Ioan 2
1 A treia zi s-a făcut o nuntă în Cana din Galilea. Mama lui Isus era acolo.
2 Şi la nuntă a fost chemat şi Isus cu ucenicii Lui.
3 Când s-a isprăvit vinul, mama lui Isus I-a zis: ,,Nu mai au vin.``
4 Isus i-a răspuns: ,,Femeie, ce am a face Eu cu tine? Nu Mi-a venit încă ceasul.``
5 Mama lui a zis slugilor: ,,Să faceţi orice vă va zice``.
6 Şi acolo erau şase vase de piatră, puse după obiceiul de curăţire al Iudeilor; şi în fiecare vas încăpeau câte două sau trei vedre.
7 Isus le-a zis: ,,Umpleţi vasele acestea cu apă``. Şi le-au umplut până sus.
8 ,,Scoateţi acum``, le-a zis El, şi ,,aduceţi nunului.`` Şi i-au adus:
9 Nunul, dupăce a gustat apa făcută vin, -el nu ştia de unde vine vinul acesta (slugile însă, cari scoseseră apa, ştiau), -a chemat pe mire,
10 şi i-a zis: ,,Orice om pune la masă întâi vinul cel bun; şi, după ce oamenii au băut bine, atunci pune pe cel mai puţin bun; dar tu ai ţinut vinul cel bun până acum.``
11 Acest început al semnelor Lui l-a făcut Isus în Cana din Galilea. El Şi-a arătat slava Sa, şi ucenicii Lui au crezut în El.
12 După aceea, S-a pogorât la Capernaum, împreună cu mama, fraţii şi ucenicii Lui; şi acolo n-au rămas multe zile.
13 Paştele Iudeilor erau aproape; şi Isus S-a suit la Ierusalim.
14 În Templu a găsit pe cei ce vindeau boi, oi şi porumbei, şi pe schimbătorii de bani şezând jos.
15 A făcut un bici de ştreanguri, şi i-a scos pe toţi afară din Templu, împreună cu oile şi boii; a vărsat banii schimbătorilor, şi le-a răsturnat mesele.
16 Şi a zis celor ce vindeau porumbei: ,,Ridicaţi acestea de aici, şi nu faceţi din casa Tatălui Meu o casă de negustorie.``
17 Ucenicii Lui şi-au adus aminte că este scris: ,,Râvna pentru casa Ta Mă mănâncă pe Mine.``
18 Iudeii au luat cuvântul, şi I-au zis: ,,Prin ce semn ne arăţi că ai putere să faci astfel de lucruri?``
19 Drept răspuns, Isus le-a zis: ,,Stricaţi Templul acesta, şi în trei zile îl voi ridica.``
20 Iudeii au zis: ,,Au trebuit patruzeci şi şase de ani, ca să se zidească Templul acesta, şi Tu îl vei ridica în trei zile?``
21 Dar El le vorbea despre Templul trupului Său.
22 Tocmai de aceea, când a înviat din morţi, ucenicii Lui şi-au adus aminte că le spusese vorbele acestea; şi au crezut Scriptura şi cuvintele pe cari le spusese Isus.
23 Pe când era Isus în Ierusalim, la praznicul Paştelor, mulţi au crezut în Numele Lui; căci vedeau semnele pe cari le făcea.
24 Dar Isus nu Se încredea în ei, pentrucă îi cunoştea pe toţi.
25 Şi n-avea trebuinţă să -I facă cineva mărturisiri despre niciun om, fiindcă El însuş ştia ce este în om.
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":42330,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Mary, Mother of Jesus","title_en":"Mary, Mother of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Mary, Mother of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereafter, the message was confirmed by her relative Elizabeth, who spoke of Mary as the most blessed of all women (Luke 1:39-45). Mary’s miraculous bearing of the Son of God was viewed as a fulfillment of prophecy (Isa 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ birth took place in unusual circumstances, when Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem to register for an official Roman census. The child was born in a stable because no other lodging was available (Luke 2:1-7). Some time later, Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt to save the child from Herod’s massacre of young boys in the Bethlehem area (Matt 2:13-18). When they returned, they resettled in Nazareth to raise their family (Matt 2:19-23). After Jesus’ birth, Mary apparently gave birth to several other sons and daughters (Matt 13:55-56; Mark 6:3). It is likely that Mary herself told Luke the details of Jesus’ birth and the unusual events associated with it (see Luke 2:51).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was twelve years old, he stayed in the Temple during a family trip to Jerusalem. Mary and Joseph rebuked him for staying behind when they departed, but they did not understand Jesus’ response (Luke 2:41-51). Early in Jesus’ public ministry, Mary encouraged him to do a miracle at a wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11). Later, when she and Jesus’ brothers went to see Jesus, he said that his disciples were his “real family” (Matt 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was crucified, Mary was among the women looking on (cp. Mark 15:40, 47; John 19:25). As Jesus was dying, he asked John, the “disciple he loved,” to take care of Mary as his own mother (John 19:26-27). After Jesus’ death and resurrection, Mary was apparently a member of the believing community; she is listed among those who were praying together when the Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>God chose Mary to bring his Son, the Savior, into the world. For all Christians, she is a model of humble and obedient submission to God’s will.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:16, 18-25; 2:11, 13-23; Luke 1:26–2:51; John 19:25-27; Acts 1:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Mary, Mother of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereafter, the message was confirmed by her relative Elizabeth, who spoke of Mary as the most blessed of all women (Luke 1:39-45). Mary’s miraculous bearing of the Son of God was viewed as a fulfillment of prophecy (Isa 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ birth took place in unusual circumstances, when Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem to register for an official Roman census. The child was born in a stable because no other lodging was available (Luke 2:1-7). Some time later, Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt to save the child from Herod’s massacre of young boys in the Bethlehem area (Matt 2:13-18). When they returned, they resettled in Nazareth to raise their family (Matt 2:19-23). After Jesus’ birth, Mary apparently gave birth to several other sons and daughters (Matt 13:55-56; Mark 6:3). It is likely that Mary herself told Luke the details of Jesus’ birth and the unusual events associated with it (see Luke 2:51).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was twelve years old, he stayed in the Temple during a family trip to Jerusalem. Mary and Joseph rebuked him for staying behind when they departed, but they did not understand Jesus’ response (Luke 2:41-51). Early in Jesus’ public ministry, Mary encouraged him to do a miracle at a wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11). Later, when she and Jesus’ brothers went to see Jesus, he said that his disciples were his “real family” (Matt 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was crucified, Mary was among the women looking on (cp. Mark 15:40, 47; John 19:25). As Jesus was dying, he asked John, the “disciple he loved,” to take care of Mary as his own mother (John 19:26-27). After Jesus’ death and resurrection, Mary was apparently a member of the believing community; she is listed among those who were praying together when the Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>God chose Mary to bring his Son, the Savior, into the world. For all Christians, she is a model of humble and obedient submission to God’s will.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:16, 18-25; 2:11, 13-23; Luke 1:26–2:51; John 19:25-27; Acts 1:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Mary, Mother of Jesus Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereaf...","summary_en":"Mary, Mother of Jesus Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereaf...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69956,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Mary, Mother of Jesus","title_en":"Mary, Mother of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Mary, Mother of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereafter, the message was confirmed by her relative Elizabeth, who spoke of Mary as the most blessed of all women (Luke 1:39-45). Mary’s miraculous bearing of the Son of God was viewed as a fulfillment of prophecy (Isa 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ birth took place in unusual circumstances, when Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem to register for an official Roman census. The child was born in a stable because no other lodging was available (Luke 2:1-7). Some time later, Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt to save the child from Herod’s massacre of young boys in the Bethlehem area (Matt 2:13-18). When they returned, they resettled in Nazareth to raise their family (Matt 2:19-23). After Jesus’ birth, Mary apparently gave birth to several other sons and daughters (Matt 13:55-56; Mark 6:3). It is likely that Mary herself told Luke the details of Jesus’ birth and the unusual events associated with it (see Luke 2:51).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was twelve years old, he stayed in the Temple during a family trip to Jerusalem. Mary and Joseph rebuked him for staying behind when they departed, but they did not understand Jesus’ response (Luke 2:41-51). Early in Jesus’ public ministry, Mary encouraged him to do a miracle at a wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11). Later, when she and Jesus’ brothers went to see Jesus, he said that his disciples were his “real family” (Matt 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was crucified, Mary was among the women looking on (cp. Mark 15:40, 47; John 19:25). As Jesus was dying, he asked John, the “disciple he loved,” to take care of Mary as his own mother (John 19:26-27). After Jesus’ death and resurrection, Mary was apparently a member of the believing community; she is listed among those who were praying together when the Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>God chose Mary to bring his Son, the Savior, into the world. For all Christians, she is a model of humble and obedient submission to God’s will.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:16, 18-25; 2:11, 13-23; Luke 1:26–2:51; John 19:25-27; Acts 1:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Mary, Mother of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereafter, the message was confirmed by her relative Elizabeth, who spoke of Mary as the most blessed of all women (Luke 1:39-45). Mary’s miraculous bearing of the Son of God was viewed as a fulfillment of prophecy (Isa 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ birth took place in unusual circumstances, when Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem to register for an official Roman census. The child was born in a stable because no other lodging was available (Luke 2:1-7). Some time later, Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt to save the child from Herod’s massacre of young boys in the Bethlehem area (Matt 2:13-18). When they returned, they resettled in Nazareth to raise their family (Matt 2:19-23). After Jesus’ birth, Mary apparently gave birth to several other sons and daughters (Matt 13:55-56; Mark 6:3). It is likely that Mary herself told Luke the details of Jesus’ birth and the unusual events associated with it (see Luke 2:51).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was twelve years old, he stayed in the Temple during a family trip to Jerusalem. Mary and Joseph rebuked him for staying behind when they departed, but they did not understand Jesus’ response (Luke 2:41-51). Early in Jesus’ public ministry, Mary encouraged him to do a miracle at a wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11). Later, when she and Jesus’ brothers went to see Jesus, he said that his disciples were his “real family” (Matt 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was crucified, Mary was among the women looking on (cp. Mark 15:40, 47; John 19:25). As Jesus was dying, he asked John, the “disciple he loved,” to take care of Mary as his own mother (John 19:26-27). After Jesus’ death and resurrection, Mary was apparently a member of the believing community; she is listed among those who were praying together when the Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>God chose Mary to bring his Son, the Savior, into the world. For all Christians, she is a model of humble and obedient submission to God’s will.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:16, 18-25; 2:11, 13-23; Luke 1:26–2:51; John 19:25-27; Acts 1:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Mary, Mother of Jesus Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereaf...","summary_en":"Mary, Mother of Jesus Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereaf...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97582,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Mary, Mother of Jesus","title_en":"Mary, Mother of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Mary, Mother of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereafter, the message was confirmed by her relative Elizabeth, who spoke of Mary as the most blessed of all women (Luke 1:39-45). Mary’s miraculous bearing of the Son of God was viewed as a fulfillment of prophecy (Isa 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ birth took place in unusual circumstances, when Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem to register for an official Roman census. The child was born in a stable because no other lodging was available (Luke 2:1-7). Some time later, Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt to save the child from Herod’s massacre of young boys in the Bethlehem area (Matt 2:13-18). When they returned, they resettled in Nazareth to raise their family (Matt 2:19-23). After Jesus’ birth, Mary apparently gave birth to several other sons and daughters (Matt 13:55-56; Mark 6:3). It is likely that Mary herself told Luke the details of Jesus’ birth and the unusual events associated with it (see Luke 2:51).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was twelve years old, he stayed in the Temple during a family trip to Jerusalem. Mary and Joseph rebuked him for staying behind when they departed, but they did not understand Jesus’ response (Luke 2:41-51). Early in Jesus’ public ministry, Mary encouraged him to do a miracle at a wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11). Later, when she and Jesus’ brothers went to see Jesus, he said that his disciples were his “real family” (Matt 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was crucified, Mary was among the women looking on (cp. Mark 15:40, 47; John 19:25). As Jesus was dying, he asked John, the “disciple he loved,” to take care of Mary as his own mother (John 19:26-27). After Jesus’ death and resurrection, Mary was apparently a member of the believing community; she is listed among those who were praying together when the Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>God chose Mary to bring his Son, the Savior, into the world. For all Christians, she is a model of humble and obedient submission to God’s will.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:16, 18-25; 2:11, 13-23; Luke 1:26–2:51; John 19:25-27; Acts 1:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Mary, Mother of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereafter, the message was confirmed by her relative Elizabeth, who spoke of Mary as the most blessed of all women (Luke 1:39-45). Mary’s miraculous bearing of the Son of God was viewed as a fulfillment of prophecy (Isa 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ birth took place in unusual circumstances, when Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem to register for an official Roman census. The child was born in a stable because no other lodging was available (Luke 2:1-7). Some time later, Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt to save the child from Herod’s massacre of young boys in the Bethlehem area (Matt 2:13-18). When they returned, they resettled in Nazareth to raise their family (Matt 2:19-23). After Jesus’ birth, Mary apparently gave birth to several other sons and daughters (Matt 13:55-56; Mark 6:3). It is likely that Mary herself told Luke the details of Jesus’ birth and the unusual events associated with it (see Luke 2:51).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was twelve years old, he stayed in the Temple during a family trip to Jerusalem. Mary and Joseph rebuked him for staying behind when they departed, but they did not understand Jesus’ response (Luke 2:41-51). Early in Jesus’ public ministry, Mary encouraged him to do a miracle at a wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11). Later, when she and Jesus’ brothers went to see Jesus, he said that his disciples were his “real family” (Matt 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was crucified, Mary was among the women looking on (cp. Mark 15:40, 47; John 19:25). As Jesus was dying, he asked John, the “disciple he loved,” to take care of Mary as his own mother (John 19:26-27). After Jesus’ death and resurrection, Mary was apparently a member of the believing community; she is listed among those who were praying together when the Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>God chose Mary to bring his Son, the Savior, into the world. For all Christians, she is a model of humble and obedient submission to God’s will.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:16, 18-25; 2:11, 13-23; Luke 1:26–2:51; John 19:25-27; Acts 1:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Mary, Mother of Jesus Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereaf...","summary_en":"Mary, Mother of Jesus Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereaf...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125208,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Mary, Mother of Jesus","title_en":"Mary, Mother of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Mary, Mother of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereafter, the message was confirmed by her relative Elizabeth, who spoke of Mary as the most blessed of all women (Luke 1:39-45). Mary’s miraculous bearing of the Son of God was viewed as a fulfillment of prophecy (Isa 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ birth took place in unusual circumstances, when Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem to register for an official Roman census. The child was born in a stable because no other lodging was available (Luke 2:1-7). Some time later, Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt to save the child from Herod’s massacre of young boys in the Bethlehem area (Matt 2:13-18). When they returned, they resettled in Nazareth to raise their family (Matt 2:19-23). After Jesus’ birth, Mary apparently gave birth to several other sons and daughters (Matt 13:55-56; Mark 6:3). It is likely that Mary herself told Luke the details of Jesus’ birth and the unusual events associated with it (see Luke 2:51).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was twelve years old, he stayed in the Temple during a family trip to Jerusalem. Mary and Joseph rebuked him for staying behind when they departed, but they did not understand Jesus’ response (Luke 2:41-51). Early in Jesus’ public ministry, Mary encouraged him to do a miracle at a wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11). Later, when she and Jesus’ brothers went to see Jesus, he said that his disciples were his “real family” (Matt 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was crucified, Mary was among the women looking on (cp. Mark 15:40, 47; John 19:25). As Jesus was dying, he asked John, the “disciple he loved,” to take care of Mary as his own mother (John 19:26-27). After Jesus’ death and resurrection, Mary was apparently a member of the believing community; she is listed among those who were praying together when the Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>God chose Mary to bring his Son, the Savior, into the world. For all Christians, she is a model of humble and obedient submission to God’s will.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:16, 18-25; 2:11, 13-23; Luke 1:26–2:51; John 19:25-27; Acts 1:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Mary, Mother of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereafter, the message was confirmed by her relative Elizabeth, who spoke of Mary as the most blessed of all women (Luke 1:39-45). Mary’s miraculous bearing of the Son of God was viewed as a fulfillment of prophecy (Isa 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ birth took place in unusual circumstances, when Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem to register for an official Roman census. The child was born in a stable because no other lodging was available (Luke 2:1-7). Some time later, Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt to save the child from Herod’s massacre of young boys in the Bethlehem area (Matt 2:13-18). When they returned, they resettled in Nazareth to raise their family (Matt 2:19-23). After Jesus’ birth, Mary apparently gave birth to several other sons and daughters (Matt 13:55-56; Mark 6:3). It is likely that Mary herself told Luke the details of Jesus’ birth and the unusual events associated with it (see Luke 2:51).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was twelve years old, he stayed in the Temple during a family trip to Jerusalem. Mary and Joseph rebuked him for staying behind when they departed, but they did not understand Jesus’ response (Luke 2:41-51). Early in Jesus’ public ministry, Mary encouraged him to do a miracle at a wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11). Later, when she and Jesus’ brothers went to see Jesus, he said that his disciples were his “real family” (Matt 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was crucified, Mary was among the women looking on (cp. Mark 15:40, 47; John 19:25). As Jesus was dying, he asked John, the “disciple he loved,” to take care of Mary as his own mother (John 19:26-27). After Jesus’ death and resurrection, Mary was apparently a member of the believing community; she is listed among those who were praying together when the Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>God chose Mary to bring his Son, the Savior, into the world. For all Christians, she is a model of humble and obedient submission to God’s will.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:16, 18-25; 2:11, 13-23; Luke 1:26–2:51; John 19:25-27; Acts 1:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Mary, Mother of Jesus Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereaf...","summary_en":"Mary, Mother of Jesus Mary, the wife of Joseph, was the virgin mother of Jesus. Luke tells us that as a young girl in Nazareth, Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a local carpenter. Before the marriage took place, an angel announced to her that she would become pregnant by the power of God’s Spirit and give birth to the Son of God (Luke 1:26-35). Mary responded to this extraordinary message in simple faith, humbly submitting herself to God’s will (Luke 1:38; see also Luke 1:46-55). Shortly thereaf...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6022,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cana","title_en":"Cana","content_ro":"<h3>CANA<\/h3>\n<p>Galilean town that was the scene of Jesus’ first miracle: changing water into wine at a wedding feast (Jn 2:1, 11). Jesus was again in Cana when he told a nobleman that his son, who was seriously ill at Capernaum, would live (Jn 4:46). Cana was also the home of Jesus’ disciple Nathanael (Jn 21:2).<\/p>\n<p>During the first Jewish rebellion, which resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, Cana was made headquarters for defending Galilee against the Romans. After the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, the town became the seat of the priestly family of Eliashib. John’s Gospel refers to it as “Cana of Galilee,” evidently to distinguish it from the Kanah located near the Phoenician city of Tyre (Jos 19:28). The traditional site of Cana, revered as such since Byzantine and medieval times, is Kefar Kana, about four miles (6.4 kilometers) east of Nazareth on the main road from Nazareth to Tiberias. Contemporary scholarship, however, has almost unanimously settled on Khirbet Kana as the site of NT Cana. That ruin is about eight miles (12.9 kilometers) north of Nazareth on the northern edge of the Battuf Plain. The Arabs of the region call it Cana of Galilee to this day. Archaeologists exploring at the site have found pottery from the Hebrew monarchy period (c. 900–600 <span>BC<\/span>) as well as from Hellenistic, Roman, Arabic, and Crusader times.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CANA<\/h3>\n<p>Galilean town that was the scene of Jesus’ first miracle: changing water into wine at a wedding feast (Jn 2:1, 11). Jesus was again in Cana when he told a nobleman that his son, who was seriously ill at Capernaum, would live (Jn 4:46). Cana was also the home of Jesus’ disciple Nathanael (Jn 21:2).<\/p>\n<p>During the first Jewish rebellion, which resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, Cana was made headquarters for defending Galilee against the Romans. After the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, the town became the seat of the priestly family of Eliashib. John’s Gospel refers to it as “Cana of Galilee,” evidently to distinguish it from the Kanah located near the Phoenician city of Tyre (Jos 19:28). The traditional site of Cana, revered as such since Byzantine and medieval times, is Kefar Kana, about four miles (6.4 kilometers) east of Nazareth on the main road from Nazareth to Tiberias. Contemporary scholarship, however, has almost unanimously settled on Khirbet Kana as the site of NT Cana. That ruin is about eight miles (12.9 kilometers) north of Nazareth on the northern edge of the Battuf Plain. The Arabs of the region call it Cana of Galilee to this day. Archaeologists exploring at the site have found pottery from the Hebrew monarchy period (c. 900–600 <span>BC<\/span>) as well as from Hellenistic, Roman, Arabic, and Crusader times.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CANA Galilean town that was the scene of Jesus’ first miracle: changing water into wine at a wedding feast (Jn 2:1, 11). Jesus was again in Cana when he told a nobleman that his son, who was seriously ill at Capernaum, would live (Jn 4:46). Cana was also the home of Jesus’ disciple Nathanael (Jn 21:2). During the first Jewish rebellion, which resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, Cana was made headquarters for defending Galilee against the Romans. After the destruction of Jerusal...","summary_en":"CANA Galilean town that was the scene of Jesus’ first miracle: changing water into wine at a wedding feast (Jn 2:1, 11). Jesus was again in Cana when he told a nobleman that his son, who was seriously ill at Capernaum, would live (Jn 4:46). Cana was also the home of Jesus’ disciple Nathanael (Jn 21:2). During the first Jewish rebellion, which resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, Cana was made headquarters for defending Galilee against the Romans. After the destruction of Jerusal...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9414,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Desire","title_en":"Desire","content_ro":"<h3>DESIRE<\/h3>\n<p>To long for, want, or covet; also the object so desired. The word “desire” occurs many times in the <span>kjv<\/span>. As a noun it translates 12 Hebrew words and 3 Greek words. As a verb it represents about 12 each of Hebrew and Greek verbs. Some of the original words simply mean “ask” or “seek,” and are translated that way in modern versions.<\/p>\n<p>Desire is a basic part of life, neither good nor bad in itself. The important moral issue is how one responds to his or her desires. It is possible to let desires control one’s conduct, or to control one’s desires and use them to serve their God-appointed purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Christians have differed on the appropriate reaction to desire. Ascetics have claimed, for example, that the desire for food and the enjoyment of eating is sinful. But Jesus’ examples in the Gospels show that he enjoyed good meals—so much so that his critics called him a glutton (Lk 7:34). His first miracle in John’s Gospel was performed at a wedding in Cana of Galilee, where the feasting probably went on for several days (Jn 2:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>Many think that sexual desire is bad, but it is of itself no more evil than the desire for food. God created people with both desires, and they both must be kept under control, in obedience to God’s law.<\/p>\n<p>How does one distinguish between good desire and bad desire? Ultimately there is one basic issue: Is a person’s desire self-centered or a desire for God’s will? The Bible teaches that the essence of sin is a determination to have one’s own way. Although King Saul never committed the dual crimes of adultery and murder that King David did, David was honored and Saul was reproached. The reason given by the Bible is that David was “a man after [God’s] heart,” who wanted to do God’s will (Acts 13:22). But Saul was stubborn and self-willed, and he was rejected for that reason (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Evil desire, therefore, is not necessarily a desire for something that one might label as wicked. It is essentially the desire to have one’s own way. As such, it is idolatry, putting self in place of God. Without desire, nothing is accomplished in life. But one’s actions must always be in accord with God’s will as it is revealed in his Word. The Bible even promises that if people take delight in the Lord, then God will give them the desires of their heart (Ps 37:4; cf. Ps 145:16, 19; Prv 10:24; Mt 6:33). When God is one’s greatest desire, all other desires become properly oriented and can thus mirror God’s own desires for his people’s well-being.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DESIRE<\/h3>\n<p>To long for, want, or covet; also the object so desired. The word “desire” occurs many times in the <span>kjv<\/span>. As a noun it translates 12 Hebrew words and 3 Greek words. As a verb it represents about 12 each of Hebrew and Greek verbs. Some of the original words simply mean “ask” or “seek,” and are translated that way in modern versions.<\/p>\n<p>Desire is a basic part of life, neither good nor bad in itself. The important moral issue is how one responds to his or her desires. It is possible to let desires control one’s conduct, or to control one’s desires and use them to serve their God-appointed purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Christians have differed on the appropriate reaction to desire. Ascetics have claimed, for example, that the desire for food and the enjoyment of eating is sinful. But Jesus’ examples in the Gospels show that he enjoyed good meals—so much so that his critics called him a glutton (Lk 7:34). His first miracle in John’s Gospel was performed at a wedding in Cana of Galilee, where the feasting probably went on for several days (Jn 2:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>Many think that sexual desire is bad, but it is of itself no more evil than the desire for food. God created people with both desires, and they both must be kept under control, in obedience to God’s law.<\/p>\n<p>How does one distinguish between good desire and bad desire? Ultimately there is one basic issue: Is a person’s desire self-centered or a desire for God’s will? The Bible teaches that the essence of sin is a determination to have one’s own way. Although King Saul never committed the dual crimes of adultery and murder that King David did, David was honored and Saul was reproached. The reason given by the Bible is that David was “a man after [God’s] heart,” who wanted to do God’s will (Acts 13:22). But Saul was stubborn and self-willed, and he was rejected for that reason (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Evil desire, therefore, is not necessarily a desire for something that one might label as wicked. It is essentially the desire to have one’s own way. As such, it is idolatry, putting self in place of God. Without desire, nothing is accomplished in life. But one’s actions must always be in accord with God’s will as it is revealed in his Word. The Bible even promises that if people take delight in the Lord, then God will give them the desires of their heart (Ps 37:4; cf. Ps 145:16, 19; Prv 10:24; Mt 6:33). When God is one’s greatest desire, all other desires become properly oriented and can thus mirror God’s own desires for his people’s well-being.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DESIRE To long for, want, or covet; also the object so desired. The word “desire” occurs many times in the kjv. As a noun it translates 12 Hebrew words and 3 Greek words. As a verb it represents about 12 each of Hebrew and Greek verbs. Some of the original words simply mean “ask” or “seek,” and are translated that way in modern versions. Desire is a basic part of life, neither good nor bad in itself. The important moral issue is how one responds to his or her desires. It is possible to let de...","summary_en":"DESIRE To long for, want, or covet; also the object so desired. The word “desire” occurs many times in the kjv. As a noun it translates 12 Hebrew words and 3 Greek words. As a verb it represents about 12 each of Hebrew and Greek verbs. Some of the original words simply mean “ask” or “seek,” and are translated that way in modern versions. Desire is a basic part of life, neither good nor bad in itself. The important moral issue is how one responds to his or her desires. It is possible to let de...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13171,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Galilee","title_en":"Galilee","content_ro":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","summary_en":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19441,"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":20204,"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":24570,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mary","title_en":"Mary","content_ro":"<h3>MARY<\/h3>\n<p>Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, then traveled to Bethlehem (Joseph’s hometown) for a census, where Jesus was born (Mt 2:1; Lk 1:5; 2:4-5). Matthew informs us that shortly after the birth the family had to flee to Egypt to escape Herod (Mt 2:13-14). Later, the family resided again in Nazareth (Mt 2:23; Lk 2:39).<\/p>\n<p>We have little other information about Mary. She was certainly a concerned mother (as her scolding of Jesus in Lk 2:48 shows), and she later had a high estimate of Jesus’ ability (as at the wedding in Cana, Jn 2:1-4). She had several other sons and daughters to care for. She appeared at the foot of the cross, where Jesus asked “the beloved disciple” to care for her in her grief (Jn 19:25-27). After the resurrection she and Jesus’ brothers were among the disciples who experienced the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost (Acts 1:14). No further mention is made of her.<\/p>\n<p>Mary’s song of praise, “The Magnificat” (Lk 1:46-55) displays her sterling humility and trust in God’s will. She is truly “blessed among women” (v 42).<\/p>\n<li>2. Mary, the mother of James and Joseph. This woman goes by several names, but in each account she appears among Jesus’ faithful female disciples, standing by the cross and witnessing the empty tomb. Matthew calls her “Mary the mother of James and Joseph” or just “the other Mary” (27:56, 61; 28:1); Mark names her “Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses,” “Mary the mother of Joses,” or “Mary the mother of James” (15:40, 47; 16:1); in John’s Gospel, she is “Mary wife of Clopas” (19:25), though she may possibly be a separate Mary. Tradition has it that this Mary was Jesus’ aunt, as Clopas was Joseph’s brother (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.11).<\/li>\n<li>3. Mary Magdalene. We know little about this woman other than that her name indicates that she was from Magdala in Galilee. Somewhere in Galilee she met Jesus, who cast seven demons out of her. She then joined the band of disciples and followed Jesus wherever he went (Lk 8:2), ending up in Jerusalem at the foot of the cross when all the male disciples had fled (Mk 15:40; Jn 19:25). She observed Jesus’ burial (Mk 15:47) and witnessed the events surrounding the resurrection. Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1, and Luke 24:10 group her with the other women who went to the tomb. John says that she was the first among these women to discover the empty tomb, the first to report to the disciples, and the first to see the risen Christ as she lingered by the tomb after all the others had left (Jn 20:1-2, 11-18). This faithful disciple, however, was not allowed to touch her Lord (v 17).<\/li>\n<li>4. Mary of Bethany. This Judean Mary was the sister of Martha and Lazarus. We know three facts about her. First, she was such a devoted follower of Jesus that she neglected her household duties to listen to him (Lk 10:38-42; Jesus approved this). Second, she was apparently upset with Jesus when he did not come to heal her brother before he died (Jn 11:20, 28-33). Finally, before Jesus died, she anointed him with an expensive ointment while he feasted at her home in Bethany (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9; Jn 12:1-8).<\/li>\n<li>5. Mary, mother of John Mark. This woman appears only once in Scripture (Acts 12:12). Her house was the meeting place of the persecuted church. Since it was apparently large and she had servants, she was a wealthy woman, probably a widow (since no husband is mentioned). In her house the church prayed for Peter, and Peter came there after being released from prison. Her son John Mark accompanied Paul and probably Peter as well.<\/li>\n<li>6. Mary of Rome. In Romans 16:6 Paul greets a woman in Rome named simply “Mary, who has worked hard among you.” At some time she had been in Greece or Asia Minor, perhaps being expelled from Rome with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2; c. <span>AD<\/span> 49). While there she had met Paul, perhaps being converted by him, and had worked hard with him in his work of evangelism or caring for the church. By <span>AD<\/span> 56 (a probable date for the book of Romans), she had returned to Rome. She was distinguished by the praise Paul heaped upon her and his other coworkers living in Rome.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>MARY<\/h3>\n<p>Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, then traveled to Bethlehem (Joseph’s hometown) for a census, where Jesus was born (Mt 2:1; Lk 1:5; 2:4-5). Matthew informs us that shortly after the birth the family had to flee to Egypt to escape Herod (Mt 2:13-14). Later, the family resided again in Nazareth (Mt 2:23; Lk 2:39).<\/p>\n<p>We have little other information about Mary. She was certainly a concerned mother (as her scolding of Jesus in Lk 2:48 shows), and she later had a high estimate of Jesus’ ability (as at the wedding in Cana, Jn 2:1-4). She had several other sons and daughters to care for. She appeared at the foot of the cross, where Jesus asked “the beloved disciple” to care for her in her grief (Jn 19:25-27). After the resurrection she and Jesus’ brothers were among the disciples who experienced the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost (Acts 1:14). No further mention is made of her.<\/p>\n<p>Mary’s song of praise, “The Magnificat” (Lk 1:46-55) displays her sterling humility and trust in God’s will. She is truly “blessed among women” (v 42).<\/p>\n<li>2. Mary, the mother of James and Joseph. This woman goes by several names, but in each account she appears among Jesus’ faithful female disciples, standing by the cross and witnessing the empty tomb. Matthew calls her “Mary the mother of James and Joseph” or just “the other Mary” (27:56, 61; 28:1); Mark names her “Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses,” “Mary the mother of Joses,” or “Mary the mother of James” (15:40, 47; 16:1); in John’s Gospel, she is “Mary wife of Clopas” (19:25), though she may possibly be a separate Mary. Tradition has it that this Mary was Jesus’ aunt, as Clopas was Joseph’s brother (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.11).<\/li>\n<li>3. Mary Magdalene. We know little about this woman other than that her name indicates that she was from Magdala in Galilee. Somewhere in Galilee she met Jesus, who cast seven demons out of her. She then joined the band of disciples and followed Jesus wherever he went (Lk 8:2), ending up in Jerusalem at the foot of the cross when all the male disciples had fled (Mk 15:40; Jn 19:25). She observed Jesus’ burial (Mk 15:47) and witnessed the events surrounding the resurrection. Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1, and Luke 24:10 group her with the other women who went to the tomb. John says that she was the first among these women to discover the empty tomb, the first to report to the disciples, and the first to see the risen Christ as she lingered by the tomb after all the others had left (Jn 20:1-2, 11-18). This faithful disciple, however, was not allowed to touch her Lord (v 17).<\/li>\n<li>4. Mary of Bethany. This Judean Mary was the sister of Martha and Lazarus. We know three facts about her. First, she was such a devoted follower of Jesus that she neglected her household duties to listen to him (Lk 10:38-42; Jesus approved this). Second, she was apparently upset with Jesus when he did not come to heal her brother before he died (Jn 11:20, 28-33). Finally, before Jesus died, she anointed him with an expensive ointment while he feasted at her home in Bethany (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9; Jn 12:1-8).<\/li>\n<li>5. Mary, mother of John Mark. This woman appears only once in Scripture (Acts 12:12). Her house was the meeting place of the persecuted church. Since it was apparently large and she had servants, she was a wealthy woman, probably a widow (since no husband is mentioned). In her house the church prayed for Peter, and Peter came there after being released from prison. Her son John Mark accompanied Paul and probably Peter as well.<\/li>\n<li>6. Mary of Rome. In Romans 16:6 Paul greets a woman in Rome named simply “Mary, who has worked hard among you.” At some time she had been in Greece or Asia Minor, perhaps being expelled from Rome with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2; c. <span>AD<\/span> 49). While there she had met Paul, perhaps being converted by him, and had worked hard with him in his work of evangelism or caring for the church. By <span>AD<\/span> 56 (a probable date for the book of Romans), she had returned to Rome. She was distinguished by the praise Paul heaped upon her and his other coworkers living in Rome.<\/li>","summary_ro":"MARY Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT. 1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, the...","summary_en":"MARY Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT. 1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, the...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24889,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Significance of Meals","title_en":"Significance of Meals","content_ro":"<h3>MEALS, Significance of<\/h3>\n<p>The meal played a significant role in family, social, and religious life. The evening meal was the time when all family members normally were gathered together, and was thus an important time of fellowship. Providing food for the traveler was both a social and a religious responsibility, while the ideal of a quiet social life was realized by having friends break bread with the family and discuss the problems of the day by the light of small oil lamps. The significance of the meal retains its central focus both in the Jewish religion with the Passover meal and in Christianity with the celebration of the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East two meals were normally eaten during the day. The first was the noonday meal, usually consumed by laborers in the field and consisting of such items as small cakes or flat loaves, figs or olives, and possibly cheese or curds of goats’ milk. This was considered a small meal, eaten for sustenance and refreshment at a time of relaxation and respite from the heat of the sun and the labor of the day (Ru 2:14). Breakfast was considered unnecessary, and biblical references to any such form of early morning meal are very few (Jgs 19:5; Jn 21:12).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in Egypt the main meal was served at noon, among the Hebrews the evening meal was the most important social occasion of the day. Then the exhausted field workers could return home to relax after their day’s work and enjoy the feeling of communal warmth as the family gathered together for their principal meal. This occasion coincided with the arrival of darkness, a time when there was insufficient light for fieldwork to continue.<\/p>\n<p>The laborer’s meal consisted of bread or cakes made of hand-ground grain, goats’ cheese or curds, vegetables (especially beans, lentils, leeks, and peas, which were popular for the sake of variety although not always plentiful), and figs, olives, raisins, and dates. Meat was usually available, but for the majority was a luxury item. Food was cooked in olive oil, and honey was used for sweetening.<\/p>\n<p>The meal was eaten together by the entire family. There was no separate dining room in the average house, and during the patriarchal period, meals were consumed while the family was seated on the floor, a mat often serving as a table (Gn 37:25). Canaanite seating habits were adopted subsequently, and chairs and small tables were used (1 Kgs 13:20; Ps 23:5; Ez 23:41). Eating in the Egyptian fashion in a reclining position became popular and continued throughout the Roman period. Musical entertainment, dancing, and riddles were sometimes provided on festive occasions for family and guests, since the meal period was the normal time for entertainment in Near Eastern society.<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, a separate upper room often served as a dining room. Guests reclined by leaning on the left elbow so that they were close enough together on their couches to facilitate easy conversation. There was a strict hierarchy to the seating arrangements (cf. Gn 43:33; 1 Sm 9:22; Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 14:8) at all formal meals, the “highest” place being that to the right of the servants as they entered the room and the lowest to their left.<\/p>\n<p>Guests washed their hands before and after meals, and normally partook of a form of meat and\/or vegetable stew from a common bowl placed in the center of the table. Instead of cutlery, pieces of bread held in the fingers were made into the shape of a small scoop and dipped into the bowl. There would usually be only one main dish requiring preparation, so that the woman who had cooked the meal could partake of it with her guests, thus fulfilling the ideals of community at mealtimes.<\/p>\n<p>On several occasions in the NT Jesus is mentioned as eating meals with disciples and friends. He and his followers were guests at the wedding feast held in Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-10), and also at a dinner given by Matthew (Mt 9:10), as well as at another given by Simon the Pharisee (Lk 7:36-50). Jesus also was entertained at dinner somewhat unexpectedly by Zacchaeus (19:6-7). On several occasions Jesus was a guest at a family gathering held at the home of Martha, Mary, and Lazarus in Bethany (Lk 10:38-42; Jn 12:2). Following the customs of smaller towns and villages, passersby may well have called into the house to greet Jesus and perhaps converse with other guests.<\/p>\n<p>There are two important meals described in Scripture, one involving the old covenant and the other the new, in which meals had a redemptive meaning for the people of God. The first was the institution of the Passover at the time of Israel’s departure from Egypt under Moses (Ex 12). The second was the institution of the Lord’s Supper. Both are discussed in detail in separate articles.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Lord’s Supper, The; Passover.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MEALS, Significance of<\/h3>\n<p>The meal played a significant role in family, social, and religious life. The evening meal was the time when all family members normally were gathered together, and was thus an important time of fellowship. Providing food for the traveler was both a social and a religious responsibility, while the ideal of a quiet social life was realized by having friends break bread with the family and discuss the problems of the day by the light of small oil lamps. The significance of the meal retains its central focus both in the Jewish religion with the Passover meal and in Christianity with the celebration of the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East two meals were normally eaten during the day. The first was the noonday meal, usually consumed by laborers in the field and consisting of such items as small cakes or flat loaves, figs or olives, and possibly cheese or curds of goats’ milk. This was considered a small meal, eaten for sustenance and refreshment at a time of relaxation and respite from the heat of the sun and the labor of the day (Ru 2:14). Breakfast was considered unnecessary, and biblical references to any such form of early morning meal are very few (Jgs 19:5; Jn 21:12).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in Egypt the main meal was served at noon, among the Hebrews the evening meal was the most important social occasion of the day. Then the exhausted field workers could return home to relax after their day’s work and enjoy the feeling of communal warmth as the family gathered together for their principal meal. This occasion coincided with the arrival of darkness, a time when there was insufficient light for fieldwork to continue.<\/p>\n<p>The laborer’s meal consisted of bread or cakes made of hand-ground grain, goats’ cheese or curds, vegetables (especially beans, lentils, leeks, and peas, which were popular for the sake of variety although not always plentiful), and figs, olives, raisins, and dates. Meat was usually available, but for the majority was a luxury item. Food was cooked in olive oil, and honey was used for sweetening.<\/p>\n<p>The meal was eaten together by the entire family. There was no separate dining room in the average house, and during the patriarchal period, meals were consumed while the family was seated on the floor, a mat often serving as a table (Gn 37:25). Canaanite seating habits were adopted subsequently, and chairs and small tables were used (1 Kgs 13:20; Ps 23:5; Ez 23:41). Eating in the Egyptian fashion in a reclining position became popular and continued throughout the Roman period. Musical entertainment, dancing, and riddles were sometimes provided on festive occasions for family and guests, since the meal period was the normal time for entertainment in Near Eastern society.<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, a separate upper room often served as a dining room. Guests reclined by leaning on the left elbow so that they were close enough together on their couches to facilitate easy conversation. There was a strict hierarchy to the seating arrangements (cf. Gn 43:33; 1 Sm 9:22; Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 14:8) at all formal meals, the “highest” place being that to the right of the servants as they entered the room and the lowest to their left.<\/p>\n<p>Guests washed their hands before and after meals, and normally partook of a form of meat and\/or vegetable stew from a common bowl placed in the center of the table. Instead of cutlery, pieces of bread held in the fingers were made into the shape of a small scoop and dipped into the bowl. There would usually be only one main dish requiring preparation, so that the woman who had cooked the meal could partake of it with her guests, thus fulfilling the ideals of community at mealtimes.<\/p>\n<p>On several occasions in the NT Jesus is mentioned as eating meals with disciples and friends. He and his followers were guests at the wedding feast held in Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-10), and also at a dinner given by Matthew (Mt 9:10), as well as at another given by Simon the Pharisee (Lk 7:36-50). Jesus also was entertained at dinner somewhat unexpectedly by Zacchaeus (19:6-7). On several occasions Jesus was a guest at a family gathering held at the home of Martha, Mary, and Lazarus in Bethany (Lk 10:38-42; Jn 12:2). Following the customs of smaller towns and villages, passersby may well have called into the house to greet Jesus and perhaps converse with other guests.<\/p>\n<p>There are two important meals described in Scripture, one involving the old covenant and the other the new, in which meals had a redemptive meaning for the people of God. The first was the institution of the Passover at the time of Israel’s departure from Egypt under Moses (Ex 12). The second was the institution of the Lord’s Supper. Both are discussed in detail in separate articles.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Lord’s Supper, The; Passover.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MEALS, Significance of The meal played a significant role in family, social, and religious life. The evening meal was the time when all family members normally were gathered together, and was thus an important time of fellowship. Providing food for the traveler was both a social and a religious responsibility, while the ideal of a quiet social life was realized by having friends break bread with the family and discuss the problems of the day by the light of small oil lamps. The significance o...","summary_en":"MEALS, Significance of The meal played a significant role in family, social, and religious life. The evening meal was the time when all family members normally were gathered together, and was thus an important time of fellowship. Providing food for the traveler was both a social and a religious responsibility, while the ideal of a quiet social life was realized by having friends break bread with the family and discuss the problems of the day by the light of small oil lamps. The significance o...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26016,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Miracle","title_en":"Miracle","content_ro":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","summary_en":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35335,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sign","title_en":"Sign","content_ro":"<h3>SIGN<\/h3>\n<p>Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the Mosaic covenant. Thus, the wearing of the law on the wrist and forehead and the keeping of the Sabbath are considered signs of the relationship between Israel and God (Dt 6:8; 11:18; Ez 20:12, 20).<\/p>\n<p>The most numerous and significant usages of “sign” appear in relation to the OT prophetic ministry. Beginning with Moses, signs are used to confirm that God has spoken to the prophet. Thus, when Moses received the message of deliverance that he was to bring to the children of Israel in Egypt and the pharaoh, he was given two signs: his staff was changed into a serpent and his hand was afflicted with leprosy (Ex 4:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Signs and wonders were also used by false prophets. After a sign had been given and had come to pass, the leaders of Israel were to examine the message of the prophet to see if it led the people away from the true worship of God. If it did, the prophet who had given the sign was to be put to death (Dt 13:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The character of the sign varies and often is miraculous. Some of the great miracles of the OT are prophetic signs—for example, the moving of the shadow back up the steps of Hezekiah’s palace to confirm Isaiah’s prediction that the king would recover from what was a mortal illness (2 Kgs 20:8-9; Is 38:21-22). Often the sign is predictive only, and the people can know whether the prophet has spoken the truth by whether or not the event comes to pass—for example, the prophet’s foretelling the death of both of Eli’s sons on the same day (1 Sm 2:34; see also 14:10; 2 Kgs 19:29; Is 37:30). Sometimes the sign was carefully timed, and the recipient was told that the appearance of the sign would show when to act to fulfill the prophetic message (1 Sm 10:7-9). At other times, the events predicted were acted out in the life of the prophet. These symbolic actions demonstrated the truth of the prophet’s message—for example, Isaiah’s nakedness for three years to demonstrate the fate of those who preached trust in Egypt’s power (Is 20:3; see also Ez 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT occurrences are much like those in the OT. There are references to heavenly signs that will occur as indications of the end of time, and those with special knowledge will understand that the end is drawing near (Mt 24:3, 30; Mk 13:4, 22; Lk 21:11, 25-26). These apocalyptic signs have no astrological connotations as in the OT. There is also mention of the sign as the seal of the covenant between God and Israel in reference to circumcision in Romans 4:11.<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the NT uses of signs are confirmations of the message given by God, and this message comes through the apostolic community to the church. Thus, there is great emphasis on the way God confirms the message of the apostles through their ability to perform signs and wonders (Acts 2:43; 4:30; 5:12; 8:13; 14:3; Rom 15:19; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus’ miracles are not called signs. Only in Acts 2:22 does Peter proclaim that Jesus’ message was attested by signs he performed. Rather, Jesus’ miracles are seen as acts of divine power and mercy. When the Jews ask for a sign, they are consistently refused, with the promise that the only sign they will receive is the sign of Jonah (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1; Mk 8:11-12; Lk 11:19, 30), a sign that refers to the death and resurrection of the Christ. As Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, however, the miracles of Jesus are seen in a strikingly different light and are considered signs. Beginning with the changing of water into wine (Jn 2:1-11), the miracles are called signs and are intended to lead those who see them to faith (v 23). Jesus even laments that the people will not believe unless they see signs (4:48). John’s purpose in writing his Gospel is to present the signs of Jesus so that those who come to faith may do so through seeing these signs (20:30). The signs in the Gospel are expressly chosen because they lend themselves to the development of true faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the miracles of Jesus confirm the teaching of Jesus. In the synoptic Gospels, the miracles are seen as acts of mercy and divine power. In John they are carefully selected to demonstrate what Jesus has to tell the world about himself. In this respect, they are a bit like the symbolic actions of Isaiah and Ezekiel in that the action of the speaker dramatizes the message. After Jesus feeds the 5,000 with the five loaves of bread and the two fishes, he announces in the synagogue at Capernaum, “I am the bread of life which came down from heaven” (Jn 6:51). He tells them not to labor for the bread of this world that perishes. In much the same way, the healing of the man born blind is bound up with Jesus’ teaching that he is the light of the world (9:5). The resurrection of Lazarus prepares the way for Jesus to proclaim that he is the resurrection and the life (11:25). In John’s Gospel the signs are not only a demonstration of divine power but also a revelation of Jesus’ divine character. In addition to confirming his divine message, they also proclaim his personhood and mission.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Miracle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SIGN<\/h3>\n<p>Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the Mosaic covenant. Thus, the wearing of the law on the wrist and forehead and the keeping of the Sabbath are considered signs of the relationship between Israel and God (Dt 6:8; 11:18; Ez 20:12, 20).<\/p>\n<p>The most numerous and significant usages of “sign” appear in relation to the OT prophetic ministry. Beginning with Moses, signs are used to confirm that God has spoken to the prophet. Thus, when Moses received the message of deliverance that he was to bring to the children of Israel in Egypt and the pharaoh, he was given two signs: his staff was changed into a serpent and his hand was afflicted with leprosy (Ex 4:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Signs and wonders were also used by false prophets. After a sign had been given and had come to pass, the leaders of Israel were to examine the message of the prophet to see if it led the people away from the true worship of God. If it did, the prophet who had given the sign was to be put to death (Dt 13:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The character of the sign varies and often is miraculous. Some of the great miracles of the OT are prophetic signs—for example, the moving of the shadow back up the steps of Hezekiah’s palace to confirm Isaiah’s prediction that the king would recover from what was a mortal illness (2 Kgs 20:8-9; Is 38:21-22). Often the sign is predictive only, and the people can know whether the prophet has spoken the truth by whether or not the event comes to pass—for example, the prophet’s foretelling the death of both of Eli’s sons on the same day (1 Sm 2:34; see also 14:10; 2 Kgs 19:29; Is 37:30). Sometimes the sign was carefully timed, and the recipient was told that the appearance of the sign would show when to act to fulfill the prophetic message (1 Sm 10:7-9). At other times, the events predicted were acted out in the life of the prophet. These symbolic actions demonstrated the truth of the prophet’s message—for example, Isaiah’s nakedness for three years to demonstrate the fate of those who preached trust in Egypt’s power (Is 20:3; see also Ez 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT occurrences are much like those in the OT. There are references to heavenly signs that will occur as indications of the end of time, and those with special knowledge will understand that the end is drawing near (Mt 24:3, 30; Mk 13:4, 22; Lk 21:11, 25-26). These apocalyptic signs have no astrological connotations as in the OT. There is also mention of the sign as the seal of the covenant between God and Israel in reference to circumcision in Romans 4:11.<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the NT uses of signs are confirmations of the message given by God, and this message comes through the apostolic community to the church. Thus, there is great emphasis on the way God confirms the message of the apostles through their ability to perform signs and wonders (Acts 2:43; 4:30; 5:12; 8:13; 14:3; Rom 15:19; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus’ miracles are not called signs. Only in Acts 2:22 does Peter proclaim that Jesus’ message was attested by signs he performed. Rather, Jesus’ miracles are seen as acts of divine power and mercy. When the Jews ask for a sign, they are consistently refused, with the promise that the only sign they will receive is the sign of Jonah (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1; Mk 8:11-12; Lk 11:19, 30), a sign that refers to the death and resurrection of the Christ. As Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, however, the miracles of Jesus are seen in a strikingly different light and are considered signs. Beginning with the changing of water into wine (Jn 2:1-11), the miracles are called signs and are intended to lead those who see them to faith (v 23). Jesus even laments that the people will not believe unless they see signs (4:48). John’s purpose in writing his Gospel is to present the signs of Jesus so that those who come to faith may do so through seeing these signs (20:30). The signs in the Gospel are expressly chosen because they lend themselves to the development of true faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the miracles of Jesus confirm the teaching of Jesus. In the synoptic Gospels, the miracles are seen as acts of mercy and divine power. In John they are carefully selected to demonstrate what Jesus has to tell the world about himself. In this respect, they are a bit like the symbolic actions of Isaiah and Ezekiel in that the action of the speaker dramatizes the message. After Jesus feeds the 5,000 with the five loaves of bread and the two fishes, he announces in the synagogue at Capernaum, “I am the bread of life which came down from heaven” (Jn 6:51). He tells them not to labor for the bread of this world that perishes. In much the same way, the healing of the man born blind is bound up with Jesus’ teaching that he is the light of the world (9:5). The resurrection of Lazarus prepares the way for Jesus to proclaim that he is the resurrection and the life (11:25). In John’s Gospel the signs are not only a demonstration of divine power but also a revelation of Jesus’ divine character. In addition to confirming his divine message, they also proclaim his personhood and mission.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Miracle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SIGN Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event. In the Old Testament In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the...","summary_en":"SIGN Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event. In the Old Testament In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56339,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1–10:42<\/strong> Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1–10:42<\/strong> Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1–10:42 Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).","summary_en":"2:1–10:42 Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56340,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:1-25<\/strong> In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:1-25<\/strong> In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-25 In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).","summary_en":"2:1-25 In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56341,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:1<\/strong> The ceremonies surrounding <em>a wedding celebration<\/em> could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:1<\/strong> The ceremonies surrounding <em>a wedding celebration<\/em> could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 The ceremonies surrounding a wedding celebration could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).","summary_en":"2:1 The ceremonies surrounding a wedding celebration could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83965,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1–10:42<\/strong> Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1–10:42<\/strong> Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1–10:42 Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).","summary_en":"2:1–10:42 Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83966,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:1-25<\/strong> In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:1-25<\/strong> In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-25 In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).","summary_en":"2:1-25 In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83967,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:1<\/strong> The ceremonies surrounding <em>a wedding celebration<\/em> could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:1<\/strong> The ceremonies surrounding <em>a wedding celebration<\/em> could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 The ceremonies surrounding a wedding celebration could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).","summary_en":"2:1 The ceremonies surrounding a wedding celebration could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111591,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1–10:42<\/strong> Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1–10:42<\/strong> Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1–10:42 Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).","summary_en":"2:1–10:42 Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111592,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:1-25<\/strong> In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:1-25<\/strong> In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-25 In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).","summary_en":"2:1-25 In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111593,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:1<\/strong> The ceremonies surrounding <em>a wedding celebration<\/em> could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:1<\/strong> The ceremonies surrounding <em>a wedding celebration<\/em> could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 The ceremonies surrounding a wedding celebration could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).","summary_en":"2:1 The ceremonies surrounding a wedding celebration could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139217,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1–10:42<\/strong> Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1–10:42<\/strong> Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1–10:42 Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).","summary_en":"2:1–10:42 Jesus illustrated his identity and work through the institutions and festivals of Judaism (see 2:1; 5:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139218,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:1-25<\/strong> In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:1-25<\/strong> In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-25 In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).","summary_en":"2:1-25 In this section, Jesus appeared at two symbolic Jewish ceremonies. At a wedding in Cana (2:1-12), he replaced the ritual cleansing water with his own superior wine. Later, around Passover, he cleansed the Temple (2:13-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139219,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:1<\/strong> The ceremonies surrounding <em>a wedding celebration<\/em> could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:1<\/strong> The ceremonies surrounding <em>a wedding celebration<\/em> could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 The ceremonies surrounding a wedding celebration could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).","summary_en":"2:1 The ceremonies surrounding a wedding celebration could last as long as a week; weddings often included dramatic processions in which the groom would bring the bride to his home for the festivities (Matt 25:1-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65814,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93440,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121066,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148692,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":1595,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Andrew, the Apostle","title_en":"Andrew, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","summary_en":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":56342,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:3<\/strong> When <em>the wine supply ran out<\/em><em>,<\/em> the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his <em>mother<\/em> brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:3<\/strong> When <em>the wine supply ran out<\/em><em>,<\/em> the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his <em>mother<\/em> brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:3 When the wine supply ran out, the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his mother brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.","summary_en":"2:3 When the wine supply ran out, the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his mother brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83968,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:3<\/strong> When <em>the wine supply ran out<\/em><em>,<\/em> the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his <em>mother<\/em> brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:3<\/strong> When <em>the wine supply ran out<\/em><em>,<\/em> the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his <em>mother<\/em> brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:3 When the wine supply ran out, the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his mother brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.","summary_en":"2:3 When the wine supply ran out, the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his mother brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111594,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:3<\/strong> When <em>the wine supply ran out<\/em><em>,<\/em> the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his <em>mother<\/em> brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:3<\/strong> When <em>the wine supply ran out<\/em><em>,<\/em> the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his <em>mother<\/em> brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:3 When the wine supply ran out, the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his mother brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.","summary_en":"2:3 When the wine supply ran out, the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his mother brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139220,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:3<\/strong> When <em>the wine supply ran out<\/em><em>,<\/em> the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his <em>mother<\/em> brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>2:3<\/strong> When <em>the wine supply ran out<\/em><em>,<\/em> the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his <em>mother<\/em> brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:3 When the wine supply ran out, the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his mother brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.","summary_en":"2:3 When the wine supply ran out, the host’s family would face embarrassment for failure to plan properly. Perhaps Jesus arrived unexpectedly (cp. Matt 25:1-13), bringing his circle of disciples, which might explain why his mother brought the problem to him. • A wedding banquet was a primary celebration in Jewish village life, and this episode also symbolized the joy of the Messiah’s arrival.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":56343,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:4<\/strong> Jesus initially distanced himself from the <em>problem<\/em>. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ <em>time<\/em> (literally <em>hour<\/em>) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:4<\/strong> Jesus initially distanced himself from the <em>problem<\/em>. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ <em>time<\/em> (literally <em>hour<\/em>) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:4 Jesus initially distanced himself from the problem. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ time (literally hour) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).","summary_en":"2:4 Jesus initially distanced himself from the problem. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ time (literally hour) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83969,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:4<\/strong> Jesus initially distanced himself from the <em>problem<\/em>. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ <em>time<\/em> (literally <em>hour<\/em>) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:4<\/strong> Jesus initially distanced himself from the <em>problem<\/em>. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ <em>time<\/em> (literally <em>hour<\/em>) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:4 Jesus initially distanced himself from the problem. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ time (literally hour) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).","summary_en":"2:4 Jesus initially distanced himself from the problem. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ time (literally hour) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111595,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:4<\/strong> Jesus initially distanced himself from the <em>problem<\/em>. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ <em>time<\/em> (literally <em>hour<\/em>) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:4<\/strong> Jesus initially distanced himself from the <em>problem<\/em>. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ <em>time<\/em> (literally <em>hour<\/em>) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:4 Jesus initially distanced himself from the problem. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ time (literally hour) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).","summary_en":"2:4 Jesus initially distanced himself from the problem. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ time (literally hour) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139221,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:4<\/strong> Jesus initially distanced himself from the <em>problem<\/em>. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ <em>time<\/em> (literally <em>hour<\/em>) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:4<\/strong> Jesus initially distanced himself from the <em>problem<\/em>. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ <em>time<\/em> (literally <em>hour<\/em>) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:4 Jesus initially distanced himself from the problem. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ time (literally hour) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).","summary_en":"2:4 Jesus initially distanced himself from the problem. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ time (literally hour) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":8881,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Deacon, Deaconess*","title_en":"Deacon, Deaconess*","content_ro":"<h3>DEACON, DEACONESS*<\/h3>\n<p>Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century <span>AD<\/span> Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsoftheConcept\">Origins of the Concept<\/p>\n<h5>Greek Usage<\/h5>\n<p>References have been found in extrabiblical writings where the Greek word “deacon” meant “waiter,” “servant,” “steward,” or “messenger.” In at least two instances it indicated a baker and a cook. In religious usage the word described various attendants in pagan temples. Ancient documents show “deacons” presiding at the dedication of a statue to the Greek god Hermes. Serapis and Isis, Egyptian deities, were served by a college of “deacons” presided over by a priest.<\/p>\n<h5>General New Testament Usage<\/h5>\n<p>The same word was used by biblical writers in a general sense to describe various ministries or services. Not until later in the development of the apostolic church was the term applied to a distinct body of church officers. Among its general usages, “deacon” refers to a waiter at meals (Jn 2:5, 9), a king’s attendant (Mt 22:13), a servant of Satan (2 Cor 11:15), a servant of God (6:4), a servant of Christ (11:23), a servant of the church (Col 1:24-25), and a political ruler (Rom 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>The NT presents servanthood in the sense of ministry or service as a mark of the whole church—that is, as normative for all disciples (Mt 20:26-28; Lk 22:26-27). Jesus’ teaching on the final judgment equates ministry with feeding the hungry, welcoming strangers, clothing the naked, and visiting the sick and imprisoned (Mt 25:31-46). The entire NT emphasizes compassionate care for individuals’ physical and spiritual needs as well as the giving of oneself to meeting those needs. Such service is ultimately a ministry to Christ himself (v 45).<\/p>\n<h5>Origin of the Office<\/h5>\n<p>There is little question that before the end of the first century the general term for service or ministry became a kind of title for a position or office in the church. That development evidently went through several stages.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical scholars emphasize a relationship between the <em>hazzan<\/em> of the Jewish synagogue and the Christian office of deacon. The <em>hazzan<\/em> opened and closed the synagogue doors, kept it clean, and handed out the books for reading. It was probably to such a person that Jesus handed the scroll of Isaiah after finishing his reading (Lk 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>Other NT scholars give considerable attention to the choosing of the seven (Acts 6:1-6); they see that action as a historical forerunner of a more developed structure (Phil 1:1; 1 Tm 3:8-13—the two specific references to an “office” of deacon). Luke devoted considerable attention in Acts to the selection of a new set of church leaders. Overworked with a variety of responsibilities, the 12 apostles proposed a division of labor to ensure care for the Hellenist (Greek-speaking) widows in the church’s daily distribution of food and alms. Seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (Acts 6:3), subsequently became prominent in the Jerusalem congregation, doing works of charity and caring for physical needs.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars caution that the diaconate should not be exclusively linked with charitable works, since the Greek word used in Acts 6:2 is related to the word translated “ministry of the word” in verse 4. Those chosen to oversee the care for physical needs were people of spiritual stature. Stephen, for instance, “full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs” (6:8, <span>rsv<\/span>). Philip, appointed as one of the seven in Acts 6, “preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” (8:12). Philip also baptized (v 38) and is referred to as an evangelist (21:8).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeaconsintheEarlyChurch\">Deacons in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>Those who cite Acts 6 as a preliminary stage of the office of deacon refer to the spread of the practice from the church in Jerusalem to the gentile congregations sprouting elsewhere. Many churches probably took the appointing of “the Jerusalem seven” as a pattern to follow, some even adopting the number seven. In a letter of the third-century pope Cornelius, for example, the church of Rome was said to have maintained seven for the number of deacons.<\/p>\n<p>By the time the church of Philippi received its instructions from the apostle Paul (c. <span>AD<\/span> 62) and Timothy had Paul’s first letter in hand, “deacon” had become a technical term referring to a specific office in the churches. In Philippians 1:1 Paul addressed the church in general and then added “with bishops and deacons.” Some interpreters consider that to be a clear establishment of two distinct groups within the larger church body, though no further description is given. Possibly the deacons of that congregation were responsible for collecting and then dispatching the offerings referred to (Phil 4:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Timothy 3:8-13 instructions are given about qualifications for the office of deacon. Although that is the most detailed treatment of the subject in the NT, it is actually quite sketchy. Most of the qualifications, dealing with personal character and behavior, are similar to those for a bishop. For instance, a deacon is to be truthful, monogamous, “not addicted to much wine,” and a responsible parent. Verse 11, requiring that “the women likewise must be serious, not slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things” (<span>rsv<\/span>), may refer not to deacons’ wives but to deaconesses, as several translations note (<span>niv<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). In any event, it is clear that women participated in the work of the diaconate.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the office of bishop (1 Tm 3:2), deacons are not described as providing teaching or hospitality. In fact, no mention is made of any functional qualifications to clarify deacons’ or deaconesses’ roles in the early church. The character qualifications listed are appropriate for those with monetary and administrative responsibilities (as Acts 6:1-6 suggests). Timothy is told that good deacons will not go unrewarded; not only will their faith increase, but also their good standing among those whom they serve (1 Tm 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>The NT writings indicate that to be chosen as a deacon or deaconess is a high compliment and affirmation. Named as “deacons” were Timothy (1 Thes 3:2; 1 Tm 4:6), Tychicus (Col 4:7), Epaphras (1:7), Paul (1 Cor 3:5)—and even Christ (Rom 15:8, “servant”). Biblical “deaconing” is not characterized by power and prominence but by service to others. In imitation of Jesus’ life, the deacon or deaconess followed the servant pattern. The Christian diaconate thus contrasted sharply with the prevailing Greek thought of service, which was considered unworthy of the dignity of free men. (The Greek philosopher Plato wrote, “How can man be happy when he has to serve someone?”)<\/p>\n<p>The office of deacon differed from the office of elder, which was adapted from a definite Jewish pattern in the OT (see Nm 11:16-17; Dt 29:10). The diaconate, on the other hand, developed from the strong, personal, historical example of Jesus, the servant who compassionately met concrete human needs.<\/p>\n<p>As the office of deacon became more firmly established, its duties could be defined as those of pastoral care. The poor and the sick received their service not only physically but also with instruction and consolation. The homes of church members became familiar territory to a deacon or deaconess. A pattern of visitation was established to discover and then meet the needs of the church body at large. Although that included the administration of funds, it went far beyond it. Those who served as deacons and deaconesses undoubtedly became symbols of loving care for the church in general.<\/p>\n<p>Where the office of deacon fits into the larger pattern of church order within the NT is difficult to determine because of the obvious variety present during the formative years. Some church historians conclude that as ecclesiastical structure developed, elders provided congregational leadership. Deacons assisted them, especially in social services and pastoral care. The late first and early second centuries witnessed a distinctive threefold ministry of deacons, elders (presbyters), and bishops. Bishops or “overseers” began to exercise authority over areas or groups of churches.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deaconess\">Deaconess<\/p>\n<p>Where did women fit into the ministry of the early church? Paul’s inclusion of references to women in ministry is striking when compared with the role of women in general in the first century. He commended Phoebe for her service in the church at Cenchrea, using the word “deacon” to describe her (Rom 16:1). He praised her as a “helper” (v 2), a word that denotes leadership qualities (cf. Rom 12:8; 1 Tm 3:4-5). Some scholars have used that reference as an example of early development of the office of deaconess. Others have interpreted it in a nontechnical sense, meaning that Phoebe functioned in a generally serving role and thus was worthy of recognition at Rome. Whether “deacon” was used technically or descriptively, ministry for both women and men in the NT was patterned after the example of Jesus, who “came not to be served but to serve” (Mk 10:45). Because of the large number of female converts (Acts 5:14; 17:4), women functioned in such areas of ministry as visitation, instruction in discipleship, and assistance in baptism. Deaconesses are mentioned in third-century documents as administering baptism to female converts.<\/p>\n<p>Considering the rigid separation of the sexes in the Near East at that time, female participation in church ministry stands out in bold relief. A governor of Bithynia, Pliny the Younger (early second century), in his <em>Correspondence with Trajan<\/em> verified women officeholders in the church. Pliny also mentioned two deaconesses who were martyred for the cause of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Elder; Pastor; Presbyter.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEACON, DEACONESS*<\/h3>\n<p>Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century <span>AD<\/span> Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsoftheConcept\">Origins of the Concept<\/p>\n<h5>Greek Usage<\/h5>\n<p>References have been found in extrabiblical writings where the Greek word “deacon” meant “waiter,” “servant,” “steward,” or “messenger.” In at least two instances it indicated a baker and a cook. In religious usage the word described various attendants in pagan temples. Ancient documents show “deacons” presiding at the dedication of a statue to the Greek god Hermes. Serapis and Isis, Egyptian deities, were served by a college of “deacons” presided over by a priest.<\/p>\n<h5>General New Testament Usage<\/h5>\n<p>The same word was used by biblical writers in a general sense to describe various ministries or services. Not until later in the development of the apostolic church was the term applied to a distinct body of church officers. Among its general usages, “deacon” refers to a waiter at meals (Jn 2:5, 9), a king’s attendant (Mt 22:13), a servant of Satan (2 Cor 11:15), a servant of God (6:4), a servant of Christ (11:23), a servant of the church (Col 1:24-25), and a political ruler (Rom 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>The NT presents servanthood in the sense of ministry or service as a mark of the whole church—that is, as normative for all disciples (Mt 20:26-28; Lk 22:26-27). Jesus’ teaching on the final judgment equates ministry with feeding the hungry, welcoming strangers, clothing the naked, and visiting the sick and imprisoned (Mt 25:31-46). The entire NT emphasizes compassionate care for individuals’ physical and spiritual needs as well as the giving of oneself to meeting those needs. Such service is ultimately a ministry to Christ himself (v 45).<\/p>\n<h5>Origin of the Office<\/h5>\n<p>There is little question that before the end of the first century the general term for service or ministry became a kind of title for a position or office in the church. That development evidently went through several stages.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical scholars emphasize a relationship between the <em>hazzan<\/em> of the Jewish synagogue and the Christian office of deacon. The <em>hazzan<\/em> opened and closed the synagogue doors, kept it clean, and handed out the books for reading. It was probably to such a person that Jesus handed the scroll of Isaiah after finishing his reading (Lk 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>Other NT scholars give considerable attention to the choosing of the seven (Acts 6:1-6); they see that action as a historical forerunner of a more developed structure (Phil 1:1; 1 Tm 3:8-13—the two specific references to an “office” of deacon). Luke devoted considerable attention in Acts to the selection of a new set of church leaders. Overworked with a variety of responsibilities, the 12 apostles proposed a division of labor to ensure care for the Hellenist (Greek-speaking) widows in the church’s daily distribution of food and alms. Seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (Acts 6:3), subsequently became prominent in the Jerusalem congregation, doing works of charity and caring for physical needs.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars caution that the diaconate should not be exclusively linked with charitable works, since the Greek word used in Acts 6:2 is related to the word translated “ministry of the word” in verse 4. Those chosen to oversee the care for physical needs were people of spiritual stature. Stephen, for instance, “full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs” (6:8, <span>rsv<\/span>). Philip, appointed as one of the seven in Acts 6, “preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” (8:12). Philip also baptized (v 38) and is referred to as an evangelist (21:8).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeaconsintheEarlyChurch\">Deacons in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>Those who cite Acts 6 as a preliminary stage of the office of deacon refer to the spread of the practice from the church in Jerusalem to the gentile congregations sprouting elsewhere. Many churches probably took the appointing of “the Jerusalem seven” as a pattern to follow, some even adopting the number seven. In a letter of the third-century pope Cornelius, for example, the church of Rome was said to have maintained seven for the number of deacons.<\/p>\n<p>By the time the church of Philippi received its instructions from the apostle Paul (c. <span>AD<\/span> 62) and Timothy had Paul’s first letter in hand, “deacon” had become a technical term referring to a specific office in the churches. In Philippians 1:1 Paul addressed the church in general and then added “with bishops and deacons.” Some interpreters consider that to be a clear establishment of two distinct groups within the larger church body, though no further description is given. Possibly the deacons of that congregation were responsible for collecting and then dispatching the offerings referred to (Phil 4:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Timothy 3:8-13 instructions are given about qualifications for the office of deacon. Although that is the most detailed treatment of the subject in the NT, it is actually quite sketchy. Most of the qualifications, dealing with personal character and behavior, are similar to those for a bishop. For instance, a deacon is to be truthful, monogamous, “not addicted to much wine,” and a responsible parent. Verse 11, requiring that “the women likewise must be serious, not slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things” (<span>rsv<\/span>), may refer not to deacons’ wives but to deaconesses, as several translations note (<span>niv<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). In any event, it is clear that women participated in the work of the diaconate.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the office of bishop (1 Tm 3:2), deacons are not described as providing teaching or hospitality. In fact, no mention is made of any functional qualifications to clarify deacons’ or deaconesses’ roles in the early church. The character qualifications listed are appropriate for those with monetary and administrative responsibilities (as Acts 6:1-6 suggests). Timothy is told that good deacons will not go unrewarded; not only will their faith increase, but also their good standing among those whom they serve (1 Tm 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>The NT writings indicate that to be chosen as a deacon or deaconess is a high compliment and affirmation. Named as “deacons” were Timothy (1 Thes 3:2; 1 Tm 4:6), Tychicus (Col 4:7), Epaphras (1:7), Paul (1 Cor 3:5)—and even Christ (Rom 15:8, “servant”). Biblical “deaconing” is not characterized by power and prominence but by service to others. In imitation of Jesus’ life, the deacon or deaconess followed the servant pattern. The Christian diaconate thus contrasted sharply with the prevailing Greek thought of service, which was considered unworthy of the dignity of free men. (The Greek philosopher Plato wrote, “How can man be happy when he has to serve someone?”)<\/p>\n<p>The office of deacon differed from the office of elder, which was adapted from a definite Jewish pattern in the OT (see Nm 11:16-17; Dt 29:10). The diaconate, on the other hand, developed from the strong, personal, historical example of Jesus, the servant who compassionately met concrete human needs.<\/p>\n<p>As the office of deacon became more firmly established, its duties could be defined as those of pastoral care. The poor and the sick received their service not only physically but also with instruction and consolation. The homes of church members became familiar territory to a deacon or deaconess. A pattern of visitation was established to discover and then meet the needs of the church body at large. Although that included the administration of funds, it went far beyond it. Those who served as deacons and deaconesses undoubtedly became symbols of loving care for the church in general.<\/p>\n<p>Where the office of deacon fits into the larger pattern of church order within the NT is difficult to determine because of the obvious variety present during the formative years. Some church historians conclude that as ecclesiastical structure developed, elders provided congregational leadership. Deacons assisted them, especially in social services and pastoral care. The late first and early second centuries witnessed a distinctive threefold ministry of deacons, elders (presbyters), and bishops. Bishops or “overseers” began to exercise authority over areas or groups of churches.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deaconess\">Deaconess<\/p>\n<p>Where did women fit into the ministry of the early church? Paul’s inclusion of references to women in ministry is striking when compared with the role of women in general in the first century. He commended Phoebe for her service in the church at Cenchrea, using the word “deacon” to describe her (Rom 16:1). He praised her as a “helper” (v 2), a word that denotes leadership qualities (cf. Rom 12:8; 1 Tm 3:4-5). Some scholars have used that reference as an example of early development of the office of deaconess. Others have interpreted it in a nontechnical sense, meaning that Phoebe functioned in a generally serving role and thus was worthy of recognition at Rome. Whether “deacon” was used technically or descriptively, ministry for both women and men in the NT was patterned after the example of Jesus, who “came not to be served but to serve” (Mk 10:45). Because of the large number of female converts (Acts 5:14; 17:4), women functioned in such areas of ministry as visitation, instruction in discipleship, and assistance in baptism. Deaconesses are mentioned in third-century documents as administering baptism to female converts.<\/p>\n<p>Considering the rigid separation of the sexes in the Near East at that time, female participation in church ministry stands out in bold relief. A governor of Bithynia, Pliny the Younger (early second century), in his <em>Correspondence with Trajan<\/em> verified women officeholders in the church. Pliny also mentioned two deaconesses who were martyred for the cause of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Elder; Pastor; Presbyter.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEACON, DEACONESS* Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century AD Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services. Origins of the Concept Gr...","summary_en":"DEACON, DEACONESS* Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century AD Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services. Origins of the Concept Gr...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":12293,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Firkin*","title_en":"Firkin*","content_ro":"<h3>FIRKIN*<\/h3>\n<p>Measure of about 10 gallons (37.9 liters). In John 2:6, firkin is the <span>kjv<\/span> translation for the name of a Greek liquid measure. <em>See<\/em> Weights and Measures.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FIRKIN*<\/h3>\n<p>Measure of about 10 gallons (37.9 liters). In John 2:6, firkin is the <span>kjv<\/span> translation for the name of a Greek liquid measure. <em>See<\/em> Weights and Measures.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FIRKIN* Measure of about 10 gallons (37.9 liters). In John 2:6, firkin is the kjv translation for the name of a Greek liquid measure. See Weights and Measures.","summary_en":"FIRKIN* Measure of about 10 gallons (37.9 liters). In John 2:6, firkin is the kjv translation for the name of a Greek liquid measure. See Weights and Measures.","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20205,"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":26018,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Miracle","title_en":"Miracle","content_ro":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","summary_en":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38322,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Weights and Measures","title_en":"Weights and Measures","content_ro":"<h3>WEIGHTS AND MEASURES<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Weight Measures<\/p>\n<p>• Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While this was a convenient system, it also suffered from a lack of standardization. Some arms were longer than others, and some donkeys could carry more than others. The history of weights and measures, therefore, becomes the story of seeking standards. This was not achieved in the OT but began to take place under Greek and Roman influences in NT times.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the measures that were used are frequently attested to in Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Canaanite literature as well. The Israelites did not have their own unique set of measurements. Yet while the terms are shared, it is not unusual to find a particular term having one value in Israel and a noticeably different value in one of the other cultures.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of the NT, other variables were added. The Israelites of this period were still using many of the measures that had been used and developed throughout the OT period. But added to that were the Greek and Roman systems of measurement. Sometimes these terms were adopted wholesale, while at other times Hebrew terms were adapted to Greco-Roman standards. On still other occasions, the Roman terms were apparently used when dealing with the government, whereas Hebrew terms were still used in everyday practice.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the kinds of measurement, the base unit (i.e., the one that all of the others are fractions or multiples of) is the one about which there is the most uncertainty. So the cubit (length), the shekel (weight), the homer (dry volume), and the bath (liquid volume) are all to some degree uncertain. This makes all of the other measures based on them equally uncertain.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WeightMeasures\">Weight Measures<\/p>\n<p>The terms used for weights have benefited most from archaeological discoveries. Excavations provide stone weights that are occasionally inscribed with the unit they represent. When the stones are weighed, they frequently give a range of weights that have only a general consistency. However, comparing this data with that provided by the text has given the basis for fairly accurate determinations. The relative scale in any given location is more important than absolute values.<\/p>\n\n<p>There was standardization of weight measures, but precision was difficult to attain. The Israelite system is similar to that used by the Mesopotamians and the Canaanites. For most of the OT period, the weights system provided the monetary system. Minted coinage was the invention of the Persians. Up until that time, silver or gold or any other trading commodity had to be weighed out so that bartering or purchasing could take place. This made the weights system the core of the ancient economy. It also explains why the Scriptures speak so seriously against the use of false weights (Lv 19:36; Dt 25:13; Prv 16:11; 20:10, 23; Mi 6:11; Hos 12:7; Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>Stone weights were used on a set of balances for conducting business in the ancient marketplace. Scales or balances are mentioned half a dozen times in the OT, but none of those are in actual economic contexts (Jb 6:2; 31:6; Ps 62:9; Is 40:12; Ez 5:1; Dn 5:27). The scales used were generally of the beam-balance type with dishes on each end.<\/p>\n<h5>Talent<\/h5>\n<p>According to Exodus 38:25-26 the talent must have been equal to 3,000 shekels. (A hundred talents would then have been equal to 300,000 shekels, and if that is added to the 1,175 shekels in verse 25, the total is 301,775, or half a shekel for each of the 603,550 men—as verse 26 states.) Excavated talents weigh from about 65 to 80 pounds (29.5 to 36.3 kilograms). In the OT the talent is used only for precious metals, usually silver or gold. According to 1 Kings 10:14, the annual tribute income of Solomon’s kingdom was 666 talents, which apparently was considered quite extravagant. David bequeathed 100,000 talents of gold and 1,000,000 talents of silver to Solomon for the building of the temple (1 Chr 22:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Mina<\/h5>\n<p>In the Canaanite material from Ugarit the mina equals 50 shekels, while in Babylon the mina equals 60 shekels. In Ezekiel 45:12, the mina is set at 60 shekels, but it is unclear whether this represents a change from previous standards.<\/p>\n<h5>Shekel<\/h5>\n<p>The shekel was the basic unit of weight. Besides the regular shekel, there was a “royal” shekel (2 Sm 14:26). Calculating by weights that have been excavated and found labeled as “beka” (one-half shekel), the shekel has been estimated to be about .4 ounce (11.4 grams).<\/p>\n<p>The shekel is used in Scripture almost exclusively in contexts dealing with monetary value. Whether silver, gold, barley, or flour, the shekel valuation assigns the commodity a relative value in the economy. Exceptions to this are Goliath’s armor and spear (1 Sm 17:5-7), which are described in terms of their shekel weight.<\/p>\n<h5>Pim<\/h5>\n<p>The only reference to this unit is in 1 Samuel 13:21, where it is the price charged to the Israelites by the Philistines for sharpening a plowshare. Excavated weights range from .25 to .3 ounce (7.1 to 8.5 grams), suggesting that the pim was two-thirds of a shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Beka<\/h5>\n<p>Seven stones inscribed with this label range in weight from .2 to .23 ounce (5.7 to 6.5 grams). In Exodus 38:26 it is the amount levied on each individual for the census tax. There it is the equivalent of one-half shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Gerah<\/h5>\n<p>Equal to one-twentieth of a shekel, or .02 ounce (.6 gram). The term is used five times (Ex 30:13; Lv 27:25; Nm 3:47; 18:16; Ez 45:12) and on each occasion is used to give a valuation to the shekel. Its use is strictly monetary in these contexts.<\/p>\n<h5>Litra<\/h5>\n<p>The NT uses the same weights that have already been identified in the OT usage, particularly the shekel, mina, and talent. There is one additional unit used: the litra, which is used in John 12:3 and 19:39 with regard to spices. In Greek literature one litra is approximately 12 ounces (327 grams).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LinearMeasuresintheOldTestament\">Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Measurements of length and depth generally were derived from a part of the body used to make the measurement. The basic unit was the cubit, and most others were related to it. Precise measurements of geographic distance are lacking in the OT and was most frequently stated in terms of the number of days it would take to arrive at a destination. A single day’s journey was mostly likely 20 to 25 miles (32.2 to 40.2 kilometers). A “pace” was equal to a “step”—about a yard (2 Sm 6:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\n<p>The length from the tip of the forefinger to the elbow. There are both long and short cubits, which are used not only in Israel but in Mesopotamia and Egypt as well. Ezekiel 40:5 identifies the long cubit as being the equivalent of a cubit plus a handbreadth (about 20 to 21 inches, or 50.8 to 53.3 centimeters). The inscription found inside the Siloam tunnel built by Hezekiah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>) indicates that the tunnel is 1,200 cubits long. The actual length of the tunnel was determined to be 1,749 feet (533.1 meters). This would yield a cubit of 17.49 inches (44.4 centimeters). All things considered, 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters) is a good estimation of the length of the cubit in Israel. This would set the long cubit at approximately 20.5 inches (52.1 centimeters). The cubit was most frequently used to give the dimensions of buildings or objects (e.g., curtains, pillars, pieces of furniture, etc.). The largest structure measured in cubits was the ark that Noah built, which was 300 cubits long (Gn 6:15).<\/p>\n<h5>Span<\/h5>\n<p>The distance measured by the stretch of the hand from fingertip to fingertip, equal to one-half a cubit, or eight and three-quarters inches (22.2 centimeters). It is used only seven times in the OT, and four of those are to describe the dimensions of the high priest’s breastplate (Ex 28:15-16; 39:8-9).<\/p>\n<h5>Handbreadth<\/h5>\n<p>The width of the hand at the base, equal to one-sixth of a cubit, one-third of a span, or just under three inches (7.6 centimeters). The term is used only five times and gives the width of the rim around the table of showbread (Ex 25:25) and Solomon’s molten sea (1 Kgs 7:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LinearMeasuresintheNewTestament\">Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT some of the units of length and depth represent Greco-Roman standards, while others are those used in the OT. Like the OT, the NT frequently uses imprecise designations for distance, such as a stone’s throw or a day’s journey. There are, however, a few occurrences of precise terms borrowed from Roman culture.<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\n<p>For the Romans, the cubit was set at one and a half times their standard foot of 11.66 inches, equaling 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters), just as the OT cubit.<\/p>\n<h5>Fathom<\/h5>\n<p>The distance between the fingertips of the left and right hand when the arms were outstretched. It is used only in Acts 27:28 and is considered to be about six feet (1.8 meters).<\/p>\n<h5>Furlong\/Stadium<\/h5>\n<p>The length of the ancient Greek racecourse, equal to one-eighth of a Roman mile, or a little over 200 yards (182.9 meters). It is usually used to give approximate distance, but in Revelation 21:16 it is used to give the dimensions of the New Jerusalem and is measured with a measuring rod.<\/p>\n<h5>Mile<\/h5>\n<p>The only occurrence of this term, Matthew 5:41, has reference to the Roman mile of 1,620 yards, about nine-tenths of a modern mile (1.4 kilometers).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CapacityDryMeasureintheOldTestament\">Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Amounts of dry goods were oriented toward practical matters such as typical donkey loads, how much seed could be sown in a day, or how much seed would be needed to sow a certain size plot. As with the other types of measures, these then became standardized.<\/p>\n<h5>Cor\/Homer<\/h5>\n<p>The most common dry commodity measure and the equivalent of one donkey load. Estimates of its standard size vary greatly, ranging from 3.8 bushels to 7.5 bushels (133.9 to 264.3 liters). Other than the seven occurrences in Ezekiel 45:11-14, the term occurs only four times in the OT. Three of these contexts feature seed or barley (Lv 27:16; Is 5:10; Hos 3:2), while the fourth is in the context of Israelites gathering quail in the wilderness. A cor is used nine times and occurs with a variety of commodities, including oil, flour, wheat, and barley, in multiples all the way up to 20,000 (1 Kgs 5:11).<\/p>\n<h5>Lethek<\/h5>\n<p>Unit occurring only in Hosea 3:2. The early versions of the Bible identified it as one-half of a cor, or homer.<\/p>\n<h5>Ephah<\/h5>\n<p>This is equal to one-tenth of a homer (Ez 45:11), or one-half of a bushel (17.6 liters). The term occurs dozens of times with all sorts of agricultural products. It seems to have been the unit most used in trading and selling. According to Zechariah 5:6-10, the ephah refers to a container that would hold an ephah of produce, much like the modern-day bushel basket.<\/p>\n<h5>Seah<\/h5>\n<p>A fraction of the homer, which has a very wide range. The term measures flour, seed, barley, and grain, and is roughly one-third of an ephah. A bushel was about five seahs (1 Sm 25:18, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<h5>Omer\/Issaron<\/h5>\n<p>The omer occurs only in the account of the collecting of manna by the Israelites (Ex 16:22). It represents a day’s ration of manna and is identified as one-tenth of an ephah (Ex 16:36). The issaron is a term that means a tenth. Its 25 occurrences are all in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers (mostly in Nm 28–29); it refers only to measures of fine flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Cab, Kab<\/h5>\n<p>This unit occurs only in 2 Kings 6:25. The estimate given by Josephus, one-eighteenth of an ephah (or about one-half of an omer), is usually accepted.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CapacityDryMeasureintheNewTestament\">Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The following dry measures are used in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Choinix<\/h5>\n<p>Occurring only in Revelation 6:6 (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg), the choinix is a little more than a quart (1.1 liters). In Greek literature it was considered the amount of one man’s daily allowance of corn.<\/p>\n<h5>Modius<\/h5>\n<p>This is the “bushel” under which one’s lamp should not be hid (Mt 5:15; Mk 4:21; Lk 11:33). It is actually equal to about a peck, 7.68 dry quarts (8.5 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Saton<\/h5>\n<p>This is the equivalent of the OT seah and can therefore also be approximated at about a peck. It is used only twice in the NT in parallel passages of the parable of the leaven, which is like the kingdom of God (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiquidMeasuresintheOldTestament\">Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Three basic measures were used for liquids in the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\n<p>The base unit for the measurement of liquids. The biblical data (Ez 45:11-14) sets it as the liquid equivalent to the dry measure, the ephah. It is one-tenth of a homer. Archaeology has also been able to provide some data for this determination. Jars inscribed as “bath of the king” were found at Lachish and Tell en-Nasbeh, and jars marked “bath” were found at Tell Beit Mirsim. The jars are not complete, so their capacity must be calculated based on a reconstruction. Using this data, the bath was approximately 5.5 gallons (20.8 liters). This estimate would provide acceptable results when factored into the information given in 1 Kings 7:23-26, where the “molten sea” of Solomon’s temple is described as being 30 cubits in circumference, 10 cubits in diameter, 5 cubits deep, and capable of holding 2,000 baths of water.<\/p>\n<h5>Hin<\/h5>\n<p>One-sixth of a hin of water was considered a person’s minimum daily requirement (Ez 4:11). A hin is equal to one-sixth of a bath, approximately one gallon (3.8 liters). It is used for a measure of oil, wine, and water, but no context ever mentions more than one hin. Rather, fractions of a hin are used. Occurrences are limited to Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Ezekiel and are therefore most commonly attested in the context of sacrificial libations.<\/p>\n<h5>Log<\/h5>\n<p>This unit occurs only in Leviticus 14:10-24 and equals one-twelfth of a hin, so about .3 quart or .3 liter.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiquidMeasuresintheNewTestament\">Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The following liquid measures occur in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\n<p>This is used only once (Lk 16:6) and is the same as the OT bath.<\/p>\n<h5>Metretes<\/h5>\n<p>This is used only in John 2:6, where it describes the containers in which water was turned to wine. Josephus identifies it as equivalent to a Hebrew bath, but in Greek usage it was the equivalent of about ten gallons (37.9 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Sextarius\/Xestes<\/h5>\n<p>A measure of capacity equal to about one and one-sixth pints (552 milliliters). In Mark 7:4 the word is translated “pitcher” (<span>nlt<\/span>) or “pot” (<span>kjv<\/span>, see mg).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WEIGHTS AND MEASURES<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Weight Measures<\/p>\n<p>• Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While this was a convenient system, it also suffered from a lack of standardization. Some arms were longer than others, and some donkeys could carry more than others. The history of weights and measures, therefore, becomes the story of seeking standards. This was not achieved in the OT but began to take place under Greek and Roman influences in NT times.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the measures that were used are frequently attested to in Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Canaanite literature as well. The Israelites did not have their own unique set of measurements. Yet while the terms are shared, it is not unusual to find a particular term having one value in Israel and a noticeably different value in one of the other cultures.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of the NT, other variables were added. The Israelites of this period were still using many of the measures that had been used and developed throughout the OT period. But added to that were the Greek and Roman systems of measurement. Sometimes these terms were adopted wholesale, while at other times Hebrew terms were adapted to Greco-Roman standards. On still other occasions, the Roman terms were apparently used when dealing with the government, whereas Hebrew terms were still used in everyday practice.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the kinds of measurement, the base unit (i.e., the one that all of the others are fractions or multiples of) is the one about which there is the most uncertainty. So the cubit (length), the shekel (weight), the homer (dry volume), and the bath (liquid volume) are all to some degree uncertain. This makes all of the other measures based on them equally uncertain.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WeightMeasures\">Weight Measures<\/p>\n<p>The terms used for weights have benefited most from archaeological discoveries. Excavations provide stone weights that are occasionally inscribed with the unit they represent. When the stones are weighed, they frequently give a range of weights that have only a general consistency. However, comparing this data with that provided by the text has given the basis for fairly accurate determinations. The relative scale in any given location is more important than absolute values.<\/p>\n\n<p>There was standardization of weight measures, but precision was difficult to attain. The Israelite system is similar to that used by the Mesopotamians and the Canaanites. For most of the OT period, the weights system provided the monetary system. Minted coinage was the invention of the Persians. Up until that time, silver or gold or any other trading commodity had to be weighed out so that bartering or purchasing could take place. This made the weights system the core of the ancient economy. It also explains why the Scriptures speak so seriously against the use of false weights (Lv 19:36; Dt 25:13; Prv 16:11; 20:10, 23; Mi 6:11; Hos 12:7; Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>Stone weights were used on a set of balances for conducting business in the ancient marketplace. Scales or balances are mentioned half a dozen times in the OT, but none of those are in actual economic contexts (Jb 6:2; 31:6; Ps 62:9; Is 40:12; Ez 5:1; Dn 5:27). The scales used were generally of the beam-balance type with dishes on each end.<\/p>\n<h5>Talent<\/h5>\n<p>According to Exodus 38:25-26 the talent must have been equal to 3,000 shekels. (A hundred talents would then have been equal to 300,000 shekels, and if that is added to the 1,175 shekels in verse 25, the total is 301,775, or half a shekel for each of the 603,550 men—as verse 26 states.) Excavated talents weigh from about 65 to 80 pounds (29.5 to 36.3 kilograms). In the OT the talent is used only for precious metals, usually silver or gold. According to 1 Kings 10:14, the annual tribute income of Solomon’s kingdom was 666 talents, which apparently was considered quite extravagant. David bequeathed 100,000 talents of gold and 1,000,000 talents of silver to Solomon for the building of the temple (1 Chr 22:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Mina<\/h5>\n<p>In the Canaanite material from Ugarit the mina equals 50 shekels, while in Babylon the mina equals 60 shekels. In Ezekiel 45:12, the mina is set at 60 shekels, but it is unclear whether this represents a change from previous standards.<\/p>\n<h5>Shekel<\/h5>\n<p>The shekel was the basic unit of weight. Besides the regular shekel, there was a “royal” shekel (2 Sm 14:26). Calculating by weights that have been excavated and found labeled as “beka” (one-half shekel), the shekel has been estimated to be about .4 ounce (11.4 grams).<\/p>\n<p>The shekel is used in Scripture almost exclusively in contexts dealing with monetary value. Whether silver, gold, barley, or flour, the shekel valuation assigns the commodity a relative value in the economy. Exceptions to this are Goliath’s armor and spear (1 Sm 17:5-7), which are described in terms of their shekel weight.<\/p>\n<h5>Pim<\/h5>\n<p>The only reference to this unit is in 1 Samuel 13:21, where it is the price charged to the Israelites by the Philistines for sharpening a plowshare. Excavated weights range from .25 to .3 ounce (7.1 to 8.5 grams), suggesting that the pim was two-thirds of a shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Beka<\/h5>\n<p>Seven stones inscribed with this label range in weight from .2 to .23 ounce (5.7 to 6.5 grams). In Exodus 38:26 it is the amount levied on each individual for the census tax. There it is the equivalent of one-half shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Gerah<\/h5>\n<p>Equal to one-twentieth of a shekel, or .02 ounce (.6 gram). The term is used five times (Ex 30:13; Lv 27:25; Nm 3:47; 18:16; Ez 45:12) and on each occasion is used to give a valuation to the shekel. Its use is strictly monetary in these contexts.<\/p>\n<h5>Litra<\/h5>\n<p>The NT uses the same weights that have already been identified in the OT usage, particularly the shekel, mina, and talent. There is one additional unit used: the litra, which is used in John 12:3 and 19:39 with regard to spices. In Greek literature one litra is approximately 12 ounces (327 grams).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LinearMeasuresintheOldTestament\">Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Measurements of length and depth generally were derived from a part of the body used to make the measurement. The basic unit was the cubit, and most others were related to it. Precise measurements of geographic distance are lacking in the OT and was most frequently stated in terms of the number of days it would take to arrive at a destination. A single day’s journey was mostly likely 20 to 25 miles (32.2 to 40.2 kilometers). A “pace” was equal to a “step”—about a yard (2 Sm 6:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\n<p>The length from the tip of the forefinger to the elbow. There are both long and short cubits, which are used not only in Israel but in Mesopotamia and Egypt as well. Ezekiel 40:5 identifies the long cubit as being the equivalent of a cubit plus a handbreadth (about 20 to 21 inches, or 50.8 to 53.3 centimeters). The inscription found inside the Siloam tunnel built by Hezekiah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>) indicates that the tunnel is 1,200 cubits long. The actual length of the tunnel was determined to be 1,749 feet (533.1 meters). This would yield a cubit of 17.49 inches (44.4 centimeters). All things considered, 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters) is a good estimation of the length of the cubit in Israel. This would set the long cubit at approximately 20.5 inches (52.1 centimeters). The cubit was most frequently used to give the dimensions of buildings or objects (e.g., curtains, pillars, pieces of furniture, etc.). The largest structure measured in cubits was the ark that Noah built, which was 300 cubits long (Gn 6:15).<\/p>\n<h5>Span<\/h5>\n<p>The distance measured by the stretch of the hand from fingertip to fingertip, equal to one-half a cubit, or eight and three-quarters inches (22.2 centimeters). It is used only seven times in the OT, and four of those are to describe the dimensions of the high priest’s breastplate (Ex 28:15-16; 39:8-9).<\/p>\n<h5>Handbreadth<\/h5>\n<p>The width of the hand at the base, equal to one-sixth of a cubit, one-third of a span, or just under three inches (7.6 centimeters). The term is used only five times and gives the width of the rim around the table of showbread (Ex 25:25) and Solomon’s molten sea (1 Kgs 7:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LinearMeasuresintheNewTestament\">Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT some of the units of length and depth represent Greco-Roman standards, while others are those used in the OT. Like the OT, the NT frequently uses imprecise designations for distance, such as a stone’s throw or a day’s journey. There are, however, a few occurrences of precise terms borrowed from Roman culture.<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\n<p>For the Romans, the cubit was set at one and a half times their standard foot of 11.66 inches, equaling 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters), just as the OT cubit.<\/p>\n<h5>Fathom<\/h5>\n<p>The distance between the fingertips of the left and right hand when the arms were outstretched. It is used only in Acts 27:28 and is considered to be about six feet (1.8 meters).<\/p>\n<h5>Furlong\/Stadium<\/h5>\n<p>The length of the ancient Greek racecourse, equal to one-eighth of a Roman mile, or a little over 200 yards (182.9 meters). It is usually used to give approximate distance, but in Revelation 21:16 it is used to give the dimensions of the New Jerusalem and is measured with a measuring rod.<\/p>\n<h5>Mile<\/h5>\n<p>The only occurrence of this term, Matthew 5:41, has reference to the Roman mile of 1,620 yards, about nine-tenths of a modern mile (1.4 kilometers).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CapacityDryMeasureintheOldTestament\">Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Amounts of dry goods were oriented toward practical matters such as typical donkey loads, how much seed could be sown in a day, or how much seed would be needed to sow a certain size plot. As with the other types of measures, these then became standardized.<\/p>\n<h5>Cor\/Homer<\/h5>\n<p>The most common dry commodity measure and the equivalent of one donkey load. Estimates of its standard size vary greatly, ranging from 3.8 bushels to 7.5 bushels (133.9 to 264.3 liters). Other than the seven occurrences in Ezekiel 45:11-14, the term occurs only four times in the OT. Three of these contexts feature seed or barley (Lv 27:16; Is 5:10; Hos 3:2), while the fourth is in the context of Israelites gathering quail in the wilderness. A cor is used nine times and occurs with a variety of commodities, including oil, flour, wheat, and barley, in multiples all the way up to 20,000 (1 Kgs 5:11).<\/p>\n<h5>Lethek<\/h5>\n<p>Unit occurring only in Hosea 3:2. The early versions of the Bible identified it as one-half of a cor, or homer.<\/p>\n<h5>Ephah<\/h5>\n<p>This is equal to one-tenth of a homer (Ez 45:11), or one-half of a bushel (17.6 liters). The term occurs dozens of times with all sorts of agricultural products. It seems to have been the unit most used in trading and selling. According to Zechariah 5:6-10, the ephah refers to a container that would hold an ephah of produce, much like the modern-day bushel basket.<\/p>\n<h5>Seah<\/h5>\n<p>A fraction of the homer, which has a very wide range. The term measures flour, seed, barley, and grain, and is roughly one-third of an ephah. A bushel was about five seahs (1 Sm 25:18, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<h5>Omer\/Issaron<\/h5>\n<p>The omer occurs only in the account of the collecting of manna by the Israelites (Ex 16:22). It represents a day’s ration of manna and is identified as one-tenth of an ephah (Ex 16:36). The issaron is a term that means a tenth. Its 25 occurrences are all in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers (mostly in Nm 28–29); it refers only to measures of fine flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Cab, Kab<\/h5>\n<p>This unit occurs only in 2 Kings 6:25. The estimate given by Josephus, one-eighteenth of an ephah (or about one-half of an omer), is usually accepted.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CapacityDryMeasureintheNewTestament\">Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The following dry measures are used in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Choinix<\/h5>\n<p>Occurring only in Revelation 6:6 (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg), the choinix is a little more than a quart (1.1 liters). In Greek literature it was considered the amount of one man’s daily allowance of corn.<\/p>\n<h5>Modius<\/h5>\n<p>This is the “bushel” under which one’s lamp should not be hid (Mt 5:15; Mk 4:21; Lk 11:33). It is actually equal to about a peck, 7.68 dry quarts (8.5 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Saton<\/h5>\n<p>This is the equivalent of the OT seah and can therefore also be approximated at about a peck. It is used only twice in the NT in parallel passages of the parable of the leaven, which is like the kingdom of God (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiquidMeasuresintheOldTestament\">Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Three basic measures were used for liquids in the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\n<p>The base unit for the measurement of liquids. The biblical data (Ez 45:11-14) sets it as the liquid equivalent to the dry measure, the ephah. It is one-tenth of a homer. Archaeology has also been able to provide some data for this determination. Jars inscribed as “bath of the king” were found at Lachish and Tell en-Nasbeh, and jars marked “bath” were found at Tell Beit Mirsim. The jars are not complete, so their capacity must be calculated based on a reconstruction. Using this data, the bath was approximately 5.5 gallons (20.8 liters). This estimate would provide acceptable results when factored into the information given in 1 Kings 7:23-26, where the “molten sea” of Solomon’s temple is described as being 30 cubits in circumference, 10 cubits in diameter, 5 cubits deep, and capable of holding 2,000 baths of water.<\/p>\n<h5>Hin<\/h5>\n<p>One-sixth of a hin of water was considered a person’s minimum daily requirement (Ez 4:11). A hin is equal to one-sixth of a bath, approximately one gallon (3.8 liters). It is used for a measure of oil, wine, and water, but no context ever mentions more than one hin. Rather, fractions of a hin are used. Occurrences are limited to Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Ezekiel and are therefore most commonly attested in the context of sacrificial libations.<\/p>\n<h5>Log<\/h5>\n<p>This unit occurs only in Leviticus 14:10-24 and equals one-twelfth of a hin, so about .3 quart or .3 liter.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiquidMeasuresintheNewTestament\">Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The following liquid measures occur in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\n<p>This is used only once (Lk 16:6) and is the same as the OT bath.<\/p>\n<h5>Metretes<\/h5>\n<p>This is used only in John 2:6, where it describes the containers in which water was turned to wine. Josephus identifies it as equivalent to a Hebrew bath, but in Greek usage it was the equivalent of about ten gallons (37.9 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Sextarius\/Xestes<\/h5>\n<p>A measure of capacity equal to about one and one-sixth pints (552 milliliters). In Mark 7:4 the word is translated “pitcher” (<span>nlt<\/span>) or “pot” (<span>kjv<\/span>, see mg).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Preview • Introduction • Weight Measures • Linear Measures in the Old Testament • Linear Measures in the New Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament • Liquid Measures in the Old Testament • Liquid Measures in the New Testament Introduction Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While thi...","summary_en":"WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Preview • Introduction • Weight Measures • Linear Measures in the Old Testament • Linear Measures in the New Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament • Liquid Measures in the Old Testament • Liquid Measures in the New Testament Introduction Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While thi...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56344,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:6<\/strong> Carved from solid rock, the <em>stone water jars<\/em> were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:6<\/strong> Carved from solid rock, the <em>stone water jars<\/em> were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6 Carved from solid rock, the stone water jars were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.","summary_en":"2:6 Carved from solid rock, the stone water jars were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83970,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:6<\/strong> Carved from solid rock, the <em>stone water jars<\/em> were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:6<\/strong> Carved from solid rock, the <em>stone water jars<\/em> were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6 Carved from solid rock, the stone water jars were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.","summary_en":"2:6 Carved from solid rock, the stone water jars were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111596,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:6<\/strong> Carved from solid rock, the <em>stone water jars<\/em> were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:6<\/strong> Carved from solid rock, the <em>stone water jars<\/em> were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6 Carved from solid rock, the stone water jars were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.","summary_en":"2:6 Carved from solid rock, the stone water jars were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139222,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:6<\/strong> Carved from solid rock, the <em>stone water jars<\/em> were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:6<\/strong> Carved from solid rock, the <em>stone water jars<\/em> were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6 Carved from solid rock, the stone water jars were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.","summary_en":"2:6 Carved from solid rock, the stone water jars were used for religious washing ceremonies (see Mark 7:1-4). Jesus was about to fill Jewish ceremony with new content.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":12226,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","title_en":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","summary_en":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":56345,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:9-10<\/strong> The <em>master of ceremonies<\/em> cited a proverb. The <em>best wine<\/em> was always served <em>first<\/em> when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:9-10<\/strong> The <em>master of ceremonies<\/em> cited a proverb. The <em>best wine<\/em> was always served <em>first<\/em> when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9-10 The master of ceremonies cited a proverb. The best wine was always served first when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.","summary_en":"2:9-10 The master of ceremonies cited a proverb. The best wine was always served first when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83971,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:9-10<\/strong> The <em>master of ceremonies<\/em> cited a proverb. The <em>best wine<\/em> was always served <em>first<\/em> when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:9-10<\/strong> The <em>master of ceremonies<\/em> cited a proverb. The <em>best wine<\/em> was always served <em>first<\/em> when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9-10 The master of ceremonies cited a proverb. The best wine was always served first when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.","summary_en":"2:9-10 The master of ceremonies cited a proverb. The best wine was always served first when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111597,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:9-10<\/strong> The <em>master of ceremonies<\/em> cited a proverb. The <em>best wine<\/em> was always served <em>first<\/em> when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:9-10<\/strong> The <em>master of ceremonies<\/em> cited a proverb. The <em>best wine<\/em> was always served <em>first<\/em> when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9-10 The master of ceremonies cited a proverb. The best wine was always served first when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.","summary_en":"2:9-10 The master of ceremonies cited a proverb. The best wine was always served first when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139223,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:9-10<\/strong> The <em>master of ceremonies<\/em> cited a proverb. The <em>best wine<\/em> was always served <em>first<\/em> when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:9-10<\/strong> The <em>master of ceremonies<\/em> cited a proverb. The <em>best wine<\/em> was always served <em>first<\/em> when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9-10 The master of ceremonies cited a proverb. The best wine was always served first when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.","summary_en":"2:9-10 The master of ceremonies cited a proverb. The best wine was always served first when palates were most sensitive; yet this miraculous wine, served last, was the very best. Good wine symbolized God’s blessing (Amos 9:13-14). The Messiah, God’s greatest blessing, had arrived at last.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":19442,"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":20206,"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":26024,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Miracle","title_en":"Miracle","content_ro":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","summary_en":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56346,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:11<\/strong> Jesus had offered his first <em>miraculous sign<\/em>. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:11<\/strong> Jesus had offered his first <em>miraculous sign<\/em>. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:11 Jesus had offered his first miraculous sign. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).","summary_en":"2:11 Jesus had offered his first miraculous sign. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83972,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:11<\/strong> Jesus had offered his first <em>miraculous sign<\/em>. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:11<\/strong> Jesus had offered his first <em>miraculous sign<\/em>. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:11 Jesus had offered his first miraculous sign. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).","summary_en":"2:11 Jesus had offered his first miraculous sign. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111598,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:11<\/strong> Jesus had offered his first <em>miraculous sign<\/em>. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:11<\/strong> Jesus had offered his first <em>miraculous sign<\/em>. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:11 Jesus had offered his first miraculous sign. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).","summary_en":"2:11 Jesus had offered his first miraculous sign. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139224,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:11<\/strong> Jesus had offered his first <em>miraculous sign<\/em>. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:11<\/strong> Jesus had offered his first <em>miraculous sign<\/em>. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:11 Jesus had offered his first miraculous sign. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).","summary_en":"2:11 Jesus had offered his first miraculous sign. In it, he revealed the glory of God (see also 1:14; 11:4, 40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65822,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93448,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121074,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148700,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":5800,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Jesus*, Brothers","title_en":"of Jesus*, Brothers","content_ro":"<h3>BROTHERS OF JESUS*<\/h3>\n<p>James, Joses (or Joseph), Simon, and Judas, identified in the NT as members of Jesus’ own family (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). They are described as visiting Jesus with Mary, his mother (Mt 12:47-50; Mk 3:34-35; Lk 8:19-21), and hearing Jesus’ statement that all who did the will of God were brother, sister, and mother to him.<\/p>\n<p>They were well enough known in Nazareth that when Jesus returned to preach there, the people said, “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?” (Mk 6:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew’s Gospel the order of the names of the last two brothers is reversed (Mt 13:55). When Jesus and his disciples went to Capernaum, they were accompanied by Mary and his brothers (Jn 2:12). Just before the Feast of Tabernacles the brothers visited Jesus to persuade him to go to Jerusalem for the festival. Although they were skeptical about his miracles, they said he should perform his feats in public to gain recognition (Jn 7:4). Jesus acknowledged opposition from within his family when he said, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his own family” (Mt 13:57, <span>nlt<\/span>). His brothers or other friends from home thought him to be losing touch with reality when crowds were first attracted to him (Mk 3:21).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of their earlier skepticism, however, the brothers became active members of the Jerusalem church during its earliest days. They are mentioned as being frequently at prayer in an upper room with Mary, showing a sharp reversal from their earlier lack of faith (Acts 1:14). One of the resurrection appearances was made to James (1 Cor 15:7). On Paul’s return to Jerusalem after his conversion, he met Peter and James, “the Lord’s brother,” but not the other apostles (Gal 1:19). When the apostle Peter was released from prison, he went to the home of Mary the mother of John Mark, and despite the excitement of the occasion, he immediately asked the group to “tell this to James and to the brethren” (Acts 12:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). A number of references in Acts show James as a strong, respected leader of the Jerusalem church (Acts 15:13-21; 21:18). In the council at Jerusalem, he expressed a strong opinion on the acceptance of Gentiles into the church; he was later visited by Paul, who told him about his ministry and the many conversions among the Gentiles. Although James is mentioned more often by name, all the brothers seem to have been well respected at that time. Thus, their actions were used as an example by Paul when he argued that it would be appropriate for him also to have a wife accompany him on his journeys, as Jesus’ brothers did (1 Cor 9:5).<\/p>\n<p>The author of the Epistle of James is generally assumed to be the Lord’s brother, although he does not identify himself specifically that way (1:1). It seems clear, though, that the author wrote as a recognized leader in the church; hence, to identify him as the Lord’s brother seems logical. The author of the Epistle of Jude identifies himself as the brother of James. The reference would most logically be to James, the leader mentioned in Acts and probably the author of the other epistle. The author thus seems to be the Judas named as the brother of the Lord in the Gospels (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the NT the group of the 12 apostles is consistently distinguished from the brothers of the Lord. Luke named the apostles and then said, “All these with one accord devoted themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers” (Acts 1:13-14). The apostle Paul pointed to the brothers of the Lord as a group separate from the apostles (1 Cor 9:5); each mention of them in the Gospels describes them as family members and distinct from the disciples.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> James (Person) #1; Joseph #7; Jude (Person); Mary #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BROTHERS OF JESUS*<\/h3>\n<p>James, Joses (or Joseph), Simon, and Judas, identified in the NT as members of Jesus’ own family (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). They are described as visiting Jesus with Mary, his mother (Mt 12:47-50; Mk 3:34-35; Lk 8:19-21), and hearing Jesus’ statement that all who did the will of God were brother, sister, and mother to him.<\/p>\n<p>They were well enough known in Nazareth that when Jesus returned to preach there, the people said, “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?” (Mk 6:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew’s Gospel the order of the names of the last two brothers is reversed (Mt 13:55). When Jesus and his disciples went to Capernaum, they were accompanied by Mary and his brothers (Jn 2:12). Just before the Feast of Tabernacles the brothers visited Jesus to persuade him to go to Jerusalem for the festival. Although they were skeptical about his miracles, they said he should perform his feats in public to gain recognition (Jn 7:4). Jesus acknowledged opposition from within his family when he said, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his own family” (Mt 13:57, <span>nlt<\/span>). His brothers or other friends from home thought him to be losing touch with reality when crowds were first attracted to him (Mk 3:21).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of their earlier skepticism, however, the brothers became active members of the Jerusalem church during its earliest days. They are mentioned as being frequently at prayer in an upper room with Mary, showing a sharp reversal from their earlier lack of faith (Acts 1:14). One of the resurrection appearances was made to James (1 Cor 15:7). On Paul’s return to Jerusalem after his conversion, he met Peter and James, “the Lord’s brother,” but not the other apostles (Gal 1:19). When the apostle Peter was released from prison, he went to the home of Mary the mother of John Mark, and despite the excitement of the occasion, he immediately asked the group to “tell this to James and to the brethren” (Acts 12:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). A number of references in Acts show James as a strong, respected leader of the Jerusalem church (Acts 15:13-21; 21:18). In the council at Jerusalem, he expressed a strong opinion on the acceptance of Gentiles into the church; he was later visited by Paul, who told him about his ministry and the many conversions among the Gentiles. Although James is mentioned more often by name, all the brothers seem to have been well respected at that time. Thus, their actions were used as an example by Paul when he argued that it would be appropriate for him also to have a wife accompany him on his journeys, as Jesus’ brothers did (1 Cor 9:5).<\/p>\n<p>The author of the Epistle of James is generally assumed to be the Lord’s brother, although he does not identify himself specifically that way (1:1). It seems clear, though, that the author wrote as a recognized leader in the church; hence, to identify him as the Lord’s brother seems logical. The author of the Epistle of Jude identifies himself as the brother of James. The reference would most logically be to James, the leader mentioned in Acts and probably the author of the other epistle. The author thus seems to be the Judas named as the brother of the Lord in the Gospels (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the NT the group of the 12 apostles is consistently distinguished from the brothers of the Lord. Luke named the apostles and then said, “All these with one accord devoted themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers” (Acts 1:13-14). The apostle Paul pointed to the brothers of the Lord as a group separate from the apostles (1 Cor 9:5); each mention of them in the Gospels describes them as family members and distinct from the disciples.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> James (Person) #1; Joseph #7; Jude (Person); Mary #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BROTHERS OF JESUS* James, Joses (or Joseph), Simon, and Judas, identified in the NT as members of Jesus’ own family (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). They are described as visiting Jesus with Mary, his mother (Mt 12:47-50; Mk 3:34-35; Lk 8:19-21), and hearing Jesus’ statement that all who did the will of God were brother, sister, and mother to him. They were well enough known in Nazareth that when Jesus returned to preach there, the people said, “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of Ja...","summary_en":"BROTHERS OF JESUS* James, Joses (or Joseph), Simon, and Judas, identified in the NT as members of Jesus’ own family (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). They are described as visiting Jesus with Mary, his mother (Mt 12:47-50; Mk 3:34-35; Lk 8:19-21), and hearing Jesus’ statement that all who did the will of God were brother, sister, and mother to him. They were well enough known in Nazareth that when Jesus returned to preach there, the people said, “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of Ja...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":1673,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Anger","title_en":"Anger","content_ro":"<h3>ANGER<\/h3>\n<p>The word normally used in the Bible to refer to rage, fury, and indignation. In most instances, anger is considered to be wrong. Psalm 37:8 (<span>nlt<\/span>), for example, commands: “Stop your anger! Turn from your rage!” Jesus paralleled anger with murder when he said, “If you are angry with someone, you are subject to judgment!” (Mt 5:22, <span>nlt<\/span>)—just as if the person had actually committed the murder he felt in his angry heart. Ephesians 4:31 and Colossians 3:8 both list anger, along with bitterness, wrath, malice, and slander, as attitudes that Christians must rid themselves of once and for all. In his list of attributes for a bishop or pastor of a church, the apostle Paul said that a Christian leader should not be prone to anger, that is, easily provoked (Ti 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible recognizes that humans get angry; it does not condemn the anger in and of itself but what often happens as the result. Humans have a habit of letting their anger get the best of them, causing them to sin. That is why the apostle Paul said, “Don’t sin by letting anger gain control over you” (Eph 4:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). The longer a person allows anger to continue, the greater the danger that it will develop sinful qualities, giving Satan a foothold (see Eph 4:27).<\/p>\n<p>Anger of a good sort is also spoken of in the Bible. “Righteous indignation” refers to the extreme displeasure of a holy heart unable to tolerate sin of any kind. The anger of God contains this element: man should be good, yet he sins—and God is angry “because they forsook the covenant of the Lord, the God of their fathers, which he made with them when he brought them out of the land of Egypt, and went and served other gods and worshiped them, gods whom they had not known and whom he had not allotted to them” (Dt 29:25-26, <span>rsv<\/span>). It was in that sense also that Moses’ anger burned on Mt Sinai and caused him to smash the tablets of the covenant on the ground when he saw the golden calf and Israel’s idolatry (Ex 32:19).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Mark says that Jesus looked with anger at the Pharisees, who were hoping to catch him breaking their law (Mk 3:5). Jesus’ anger was also shown in his cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-22); it should have been a place of prayer but was being used as a place of business. So Jesus “entered the Temple and began to drive out the merchants and their customers. He knocked over the tables of the money changers and the stalls of those selling doves” (Mt 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). His holy indignation was neither a weakness nor a sin. Such anger is an appropriate response to iniquity and injustice, especially when they are apparently unpunished.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANGER<\/h3>\n<p>The word normally used in the Bible to refer to rage, fury, and indignation. In most instances, anger is considered to be wrong. Psalm 37:8 (<span>nlt<\/span>), for example, commands: “Stop your anger! Turn from your rage!” Jesus paralleled anger with murder when he said, “If you are angry with someone, you are subject to judgment!” (Mt 5:22, <span>nlt<\/span>)—just as if the person had actually committed the murder he felt in his angry heart. Ephesians 4:31 and Colossians 3:8 both list anger, along with bitterness, wrath, malice, and slander, as attitudes that Christians must rid themselves of once and for all. In his list of attributes for a bishop or pastor of a church, the apostle Paul said that a Christian leader should not be prone to anger, that is, easily provoked (Ti 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible recognizes that humans get angry; it does not condemn the anger in and of itself but what often happens as the result. Humans have a habit of letting their anger get the best of them, causing them to sin. That is why the apostle Paul said, “Don’t sin by letting anger gain control over you” (Eph 4:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). The longer a person allows anger to continue, the greater the danger that it will develop sinful qualities, giving Satan a foothold (see Eph 4:27).<\/p>\n<p>Anger of a good sort is also spoken of in the Bible. “Righteous indignation” refers to the extreme displeasure of a holy heart unable to tolerate sin of any kind. The anger of God contains this element: man should be good, yet he sins—and God is angry “because they forsook the covenant of the Lord, the God of their fathers, which he made with them when he brought them out of the land of Egypt, and went and served other gods and worshiped them, gods whom they had not known and whom he had not allotted to them” (Dt 29:25-26, <span>rsv<\/span>). It was in that sense also that Moses’ anger burned on Mt Sinai and caused him to smash the tablets of the covenant on the ground when he saw the golden calf and Israel’s idolatry (Ex 32:19).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Mark says that Jesus looked with anger at the Pharisees, who were hoping to catch him breaking their law (Mk 3:5). Jesus’ anger was also shown in his cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-22); it should have been a place of prayer but was being used as a place of business. So Jesus “entered the Temple and began to drive out the merchants and their customers. He knocked over the tables of the money changers and the stalls of those selling doves” (Mt 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). His holy indignation was neither a weakness nor a sin. Such anger is an appropriate response to iniquity and injustice, especially when they are apparently unpunished.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANGER The word normally used in the Bible to refer to rage, fury, and indignation. In most instances, anger is considered to be wrong. Psalm 37:8 (nlt), for example, commands: “Stop your anger! Turn from your rage!” Jesus paralleled anger with murder when he said, “If you are angry with someone, you are subject to judgment!” (Mt 5:22, nlt)—just as if the person had actually committed the murder he felt in his angry heart. Ephesians 4:31 and Colossians 3:8 both list anger, along with bitternes...","summary_en":"ANGER The word normally used in the Bible to refer to rage, fury, and indignation. In most instances, anger is considered to be wrong. Psalm 37:8 (nlt), for example, commands: “Stop your anger! Turn from your rage!” Jesus paralleled anger with murder when he said, “If you are angry with someone, you are subject to judgment!” (Mt 5:22, nlt)—just as if the person had actually committed the murder he felt in his angry heart. Ephesians 4:31 and Colossians 3:8 both list anger, along with bitternes...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6484,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible* (New Testament), Chronology","title_en":"of the Bible* (New Testament), Chronology","content_ro":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.<\/p>\n\n<p>A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into <span>BC<\/span> (before Christ) and <span>AD<\/span> (<em>anno Domini,<\/em> “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChronologyofJesusLife\">Chronology of Jesus’ Life<\/p>\n<h5>Birth<\/h5>\n<p>According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century <span>AD<\/span> historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 <span>BC<\/span>. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.<\/p>\n<p>Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 <span>BC<\/span>. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in <span>AD<\/span> 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginning of Public Ministry<\/h5>\n<p>Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets <span>AD<\/span> 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely <span>AD<\/span> 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before <span>AD<\/span> 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in <span>AD<\/span> 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is <span>AD<\/span> 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.<\/p>\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 50<\/h4>\n<p>Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks\/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.<\/p>\n<p>After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.<\/p>\n<p>One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in <span>AD<\/span> 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.<\/p>\n<p>Since Herod Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.<\/p>\n<p>When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.<\/p>\n<p>The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).<\/p>\n\n<p>Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas\/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of those arguments for chronology is that, according to the first view, Paul’s conversion came 17 years before the famine visit of Acts 11:30 (cf. Gal 1:18; 2:1). According to the second view, Paul’s conversion took place 17 years before the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The difference amounts to only one year, however.<\/p>\n<p>It is helpful to consider one more date that can be fixed with high probability—namely, Paul’s arrival in Corinth on his second missionary journey (Acts 18:1). On the second missionary journey (15:40–18:22), Paul and Silas set out on land through Syria, Cilicia, Phrygia, and Galatia, visiting churches founded on the first missionary journey. They came to Troas, then passed over to Philippi and continued down the coast through Thessalonica and Berea. Paul went on to Athens before arriving at Corinth. From Acts 18:12 we know that Gallio was a proconsul in Corinth while Paul was there. An inscription discovered at nearby Delphi indicates that in all likelihood Gallio’s term of office was from mid-51 to mid-52. The incident recorded in Acts 18:12-17 probably occurred at the beginning of Gallio’s term, since the Jews hoped to get a ruling against Paul from their new proconsul. Not long after that, Paul left Corinth, probably in the summer or autumn of 52. According to Acts 18:11 Paul had spent 18 months in Corinth; that means that he probably arrived in the early months of 50 or the end of 49. That arrival date is confirmed by Acts 18:2, which says that Aquila and Priscilla had only recently been exiled from Rome when Paul came to Corinth. A fifth-century historian, Orosius, dated the edict of Claudius expelling the Jews from Rome in <span>AD<\/span> 49. Therefore, Paul and Aquila and Priscilla probably arrived close together late in 49 or early in 50. Early in his 18-month stay Paul wrote his First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians.<\/p>\n<p>The two fixed dates, then, are 46 or 47 for the famine visit (Acts 11:30) and late 49 or early 50 for Paul’s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18:1). Taking into account the time gaps mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and 2:1, as well as the supposition that the first missionary journey lasted about a year, the two reconstructions are presented in the following table. Keep in mind that they are approximations and that they reflect the ancient custom of counting a part of a year as a whole year.<\/p>\n\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 70<\/h4>\n<p>Acts 24:27 describes an event that helps us date events in the rest of the book, namely, Porcius Festus’s replacement of Felix as the governor of Judea. A careful analysis of the evidence given by Eusebius, a fourth-century historian, leads to the probable conclusion that Felix was replaced in the summer of 59.<\/p>\n<p>Working backward from that date, Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21:33) must have occurred in 57, some two years before the coming of Festus. More precisely, Paul’s arrest probably occurred in the late spring or summer of 57; Paul’s goal (20:16) was to arrive in Jerusalem by Pentecost of that year, and Pentecost occurred at the end of May. He was not long in the city before he was arrested.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover festival, 50 days before Pentecost, was celebrated by Paul with the church in Philippi (Acts 20:6). That would have been April 7–14, <span>AD<\/span> 57. Only after the feast did he continue his hurried journey to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:6–21:16). Before his Passover visit to Philippi, Paul had spent three months in Greece (20:3). Allowing some time for him to travel through Macedonia and visit the Thessalonians and Bereans, those three months were probably the winter months of 56–57 (Acts 20:3; cf. 1 Cor 16:6). No doubt they were spent in the main church of Greece, Corinth, and were used in part for the writing of the Letter to the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Between Paul’s departure from Corinth on the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18) in the autumn of 51 and his arrival in Corinth on the third missionary journey (20:2) in the late winter of 56 are five years of activities that cannot be given exact dates. Paul said that he worked during three of those years in Ephesus (20:31; cf. 19:1–20:1). With enough time allowed for the travels before and after, that stay at Ephesus probably lasted from 52 or 53 to the summer of 55 or 56 (cf. 1 Cor 16:8). During his long stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote his First Letter to the Corinthians. Then, on his way to Corinth in 56, he wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia.<\/p>\n<p>Festus arrived as governor in the summer of 59, after Paul had been in prison in Caesarea for two years. Within a matter of days, Paul was tried before Festus (Acts 25:1-12). Not wanting to be remanded to the Jewish authorities, Paul appealed to Caesar (v 12), which meant that he would go to Rome. The account in Acts gives no hint of a delay, so the voyage most likely began in the summer or fall of 59 (27:2).<\/p>\n<p>Luke reported that when Paul the prisoner got to Fair Havens on the island of Crete, the weather had become dangerous for sea travel “because the fast had already gone by” (Acts 27:8-9). One ancient writer said that sailing became dangerous between mid-September and mid-November, and after that, impossible until spring. The fast referred to was no doubt the one in preparation for the Day of Atonement, which in the year 59 fell on October 5. It is not surprising that, 14 days after leaving Fair Havens, the ship in which Paul was traveling was wrecked on the coast of Malta, south of Sicily (vv 27-44). Three months later Paul set sail for Rome again in a ship that had spent the winter at Malta (28:11). Soon he was welcomed into Rome by Christians who came out to meet him (v 15). Thus Paul arrived in Rome in the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 60. The book of Acts closes with the remark that “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house” (v 30, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT does not report the outcome of his trial. During that period, according to the traditional view, he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius wrote, “Tradition has it that after defending himself the Apostle was again sent on the ministry of preaching, and coming a second time to the same city suffered martyrdom under Nero.” Nero, who was the Roman emperor from 54 to 68, put to death a multitude of Christians in Rome soon after a disastrous fire in July of 64, according to the Roman historian Tacitus. A number of early Christian writings (e.g., Clement) seem to indicate that Peter and Paul were both killed in Rome during that savage persecution. If so, and if Eusebius was right, then Paul may have spent the two years from 62 to 64 freely ministering back in the eastern provinces. Many conservative scholars date Paul’s First Letter to Timothy and his Letter to Titus from that period. Written from Rome shortly before Paul’s martyrdom in 64, 2 Timothy was probably his last letter (2 Tm 2:9; 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Jerusalem, within three years after Paul had been carried off to Rome, James the brother of Jesus was stoned to death by the Jewish authorities. According to Josephus, that occurred in 62. Not long afterward, according to Eusebius, the church in Jerusalem received a prophecy warning them to leave that doomed city and settle in Pella, one of the cities of the Decapolis (“ten cities”) east of the Jordan. Thus when war broke out between the Jews and the Romans in 66, the Christians for the most part escaped its fury. That war ended in 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Mk 13:2; Lk 21:24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Apostle, Apostleship; Age; “Date” under each NT book; First Jewish Revolt; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.<\/p>\n\n<p>A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into <span>BC<\/span> (before Christ) and <span>AD<\/span> (<em>anno Domini,<\/em> “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChronologyofJesusLife\">Chronology of Jesus’ Life<\/p>\n<h5>Birth<\/h5>\n<p>According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century <span>AD<\/span> historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 <span>BC<\/span>. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.<\/p>\n<p>Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 <span>BC<\/span>. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in <span>AD<\/span> 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginning of Public Ministry<\/h5>\n<p>Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets <span>AD<\/span> 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely <span>AD<\/span> 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before <span>AD<\/span> 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in <span>AD<\/span> 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is <span>AD<\/span> 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.<\/p>\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 50<\/h4>\n<p>Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks\/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.<\/p>\n<p>After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.<\/p>\n<p>One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in <span>AD<\/span> 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.<\/p>\n<p>Since Herod Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.<\/p>\n<p>When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.<\/p>\n<p>The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).<\/p>\n\n<p>Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas\/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of those arguments for chronology is that, according to the first view, Paul’s conversion came 17 years before the famine visit of Acts 11:30 (cf. Gal 1:18; 2:1). According to the second view, Paul’s conversion took place 17 years before the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The difference amounts to only one year, however.<\/p>\n<p>It is helpful to consider one more date that can be fixed with high probability—namely, Paul’s arrival in Corinth on his second missionary journey (Acts 18:1). On the second missionary journey (15:40–18:22), Paul and Silas set out on land through Syria, Cilicia, Phrygia, and Galatia, visiting churches founded on the first missionary journey. They came to Troas, then passed over to Philippi and continued down the coast through Thessalonica and Berea. Paul went on to Athens before arriving at Corinth. From Acts 18:12 we know that Gallio was a proconsul in Corinth while Paul was there. An inscription discovered at nearby Delphi indicates that in all likelihood Gallio’s term of office was from mid-51 to mid-52. The incident recorded in Acts 18:12-17 probably occurred at the beginning of Gallio’s term, since the Jews hoped to get a ruling against Paul from their new proconsul. Not long after that, Paul left Corinth, probably in the summer or autumn of 52. According to Acts 18:11 Paul had spent 18 months in Corinth; that means that he probably arrived in the early months of 50 or the end of 49. That arrival date is confirmed by Acts 18:2, which says that Aquila and Priscilla had only recently been exiled from Rome when Paul came to Corinth. A fifth-century historian, Orosius, dated the edict of Claudius expelling the Jews from Rome in <span>AD<\/span> 49. Therefore, Paul and Aquila and Priscilla probably arrived close together late in 49 or early in 50. Early in his 18-month stay Paul wrote his First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians.<\/p>\n<p>The two fixed dates, then, are 46 or 47 for the famine visit (Acts 11:30) and late 49 or early 50 for Paul’s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18:1). Taking into account the time gaps mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and 2:1, as well as the supposition that the first missionary journey lasted about a year, the two reconstructions are presented in the following table. Keep in mind that they are approximations and that they reflect the ancient custom of counting a part of a year as a whole year.<\/p>\n\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 70<\/h4>\n<p>Acts 24:27 describes an event that helps us date events in the rest of the book, namely, Porcius Festus’s replacement of Felix as the governor of Judea. A careful analysis of the evidence given by Eusebius, a fourth-century historian, leads to the probable conclusion that Felix was replaced in the summer of 59.<\/p>\n<p>Working backward from that date, Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21:33) must have occurred in 57, some two years before the coming of Festus. More precisely, Paul’s arrest probably occurred in the late spring or summer of 57; Paul’s goal (20:16) was to arrive in Jerusalem by Pentecost of that year, and Pentecost occurred at the end of May. He was not long in the city before he was arrested.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover festival, 50 days before Pentecost, was celebrated by Paul with the church in Philippi (Acts 20:6). That would have been April 7–14, <span>AD<\/span> 57. Only after the feast did he continue his hurried journey to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:6–21:16). Before his Passover visit to Philippi, Paul had spent three months in Greece (20:3). Allowing some time for him to travel through Macedonia and visit the Thessalonians and Bereans, those three months were probably the winter months of 56–57 (Acts 20:3; cf. 1 Cor 16:6). No doubt they were spent in the main church of Greece, Corinth, and were used in part for the writing of the Letter to the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Between Paul’s departure from Corinth on the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18) in the autumn of 51 and his arrival in Corinth on the third missionary journey (20:2) in the late winter of 56 are five years of activities that cannot be given exact dates. Paul said that he worked during three of those years in Ephesus (20:31; cf. 19:1–20:1). With enough time allowed for the travels before and after, that stay at Ephesus probably lasted from 52 or 53 to the summer of 55 or 56 (cf. 1 Cor 16:8). During his long stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote his First Letter to the Corinthians. Then, on his way to Corinth in 56, he wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia.<\/p>\n<p>Festus arrived as governor in the summer of 59, after Paul had been in prison in Caesarea for two years. Within a matter of days, Paul was tried before Festus (Acts 25:1-12). Not wanting to be remanded to the Jewish authorities, Paul appealed to Caesar (v 12), which meant that he would go to Rome. The account in Acts gives no hint of a delay, so the voyage most likely began in the summer or fall of 59 (27:2).<\/p>\n<p>Luke reported that when Paul the prisoner got to Fair Havens on the island of Crete, the weather had become dangerous for sea travel “because the fast had already gone by” (Acts 27:8-9). One ancient writer said that sailing became dangerous between mid-September and mid-November, and after that, impossible until spring. The fast referred to was no doubt the one in preparation for the Day of Atonement, which in the year 59 fell on October 5. It is not surprising that, 14 days after leaving Fair Havens, the ship in which Paul was traveling was wrecked on the coast of Malta, south of Sicily (vv 27-44). Three months later Paul set sail for Rome again in a ship that had spent the winter at Malta (28:11). Soon he was welcomed into Rome by Christians who came out to meet him (v 15). Thus Paul arrived in Rome in the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 60. The book of Acts closes with the remark that “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house” (v 30, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT does not report the outcome of his trial. During that period, according to the traditional view, he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius wrote, “Tradition has it that after defending himself the Apostle was again sent on the ministry of preaching, and coming a second time to the same city suffered martyrdom under Nero.” Nero, who was the Roman emperor from 54 to 68, put to death a multitude of Christians in Rome soon after a disastrous fire in July of 64, according to the Roman historian Tacitus. A number of early Christian writings (e.g., Clement) seem to indicate that Peter and Paul were both killed in Rome during that savage persecution. If so, and if Eusebius was right, then Paul may have spent the two years from 62 to 64 freely ministering back in the eastern provinces. Many conservative scholars date Paul’s First Letter to Timothy and his Letter to Titus from that period. Written from Rome shortly before Paul’s martyrdom in 64, 2 Timothy was probably his last letter (2 Tm 2:9; 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Jerusalem, within three years after Paul had been carried off to Rome, James the brother of Jesus was stoned to death by the Jewish authorities. According to Josephus, that occurred in 62. Not long afterward, according to Eusebius, the church in Jerusalem received a prophecy warning them to leave that doomed city and settle in Pella, one of the cities of the Decapolis (“ten cities”) east of the Jordan. Thus when war broke out between the Jews and the Romans in 66, the Christians for the most part escaped its fury. That war ended in 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Mk 13:2; Lk 21:24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Apostle, Apostleship; Age; “Date” under each NT book; First Jewish Revolt; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates. A rema...","summary_en":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates. A rema...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12216,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","title_en":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","summary_en":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19443,"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":24055,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Malachi","title_en":"Book of Malachi","content_ro":"<h3>MALACHI, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Yet it would be most unusual for the Jews to preserve a prophetic book without explicitly attaching to it the name of the author. All of the other major and minor prophets—including Obadiah—are named after a particular prophet. Moreover, “messenger of the Lord” would be a most appropriate name for a prophet (cf. 2 Chr 36:15-16; Hg 1:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>During the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, the struggling Jewish community in Judah was greatly assisted by the return of Ezra and Nehemiah. In 458 <span>BC<\/span> Ezra was encouraged by King Artaxerxes of Persia to lead a group of exiles back to Jerusalem and to institute religious reform. About 13 years later, in 445 <span>BC<\/span>, a high-ranking government official named Nehemiah was allowed to go to Jerusalem to rebuild the city walls, a task he accomplished in 52 days (Neh 6:15). As governor, Nehemiah led the people in a financial reform that provided for the poor and encouraged tithing to support the priests and Levites (5:2-13; 10:35-39). Like Ezra, Nehemiah urged the people to keep the Sabbath and avoid intermarrying with pagan neighbors. After a 12-year term, Nehemiah returned to Persia and the spiritual condition of Judah deteriorated. Perhaps discouraged by their lack of political power, tithing became sporadic, the Sabbath was not kept, intermarriage was common, and even the priests could not be trusted. When Nehemiah came back to Jerusalem sometime later, he had to take firm action to straighten out the situation (13:6-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Since Malachi had to deal with the same sins mentioned in Nehemiah 13 (see Mal 1:6-14; 2:14-16; 3:8-11), it is likely that the prophet ministered either during Nehemiah’s second term as governor or in the years just before his return. The reference to “the governor” in Malachi 1:8 implies that someone other than Nehemiah was in office, so it may be best to place Malachi just after 433 <span>BC<\/span>, the year Nehemiah had returned to Persia.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheology\">Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>Malachi was written to shake the people of Judah from their spiritual lethargy and to warn them that judgment was coming unless they repented. The people doubted God’s love (1:2) and justice (2:17) and did not take his commands seriously (1:6; 3:14-18). Yet God was “a great King” (1:14) with a great name that was to be feared even beyond the border of Israel (vv 5, 11). Malachi repeatedly urged both the priests and the people to revere God and give him the honor he deserved. God was Israel’s Father and Creator (2:10), but the nation showed contempt for his name (1:6; 3:5). In response to this contempt, God would send his messenger to announce the Day of the Lord (3:1). John the Baptist did call the nation to repentance, and Christ came to cleanse the temple (Jn 2:14-15) and to establish the covenant (Mal 3:1-2). Most of the work of refining and purifying will take place at the Second Coming, when Christ returns to purify his people (cf. vv 2-4) and judge the wicked (4:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Great Love for Israel (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>To introduce the book, Malachi presents a contrast between God’s love for Israel and his hatred for Edom. Yet the assertion of God’s love is greeted with a strange question: “How have you loved us?” God loved Israel by entering into a covenant with the nation at Mt Sinai, just after he had freed them from the prison of Egypt. He had chosen them as his special people (cf. Gn 12:1-3; Ex 19:5-6), whereas the descendants of Esau were not chosen (cf. Rom 9:10-13). Both Israel and Edom endured invasion and destruction, but only Israel was restored and rebuilt after the exile. The people of Edom were driven from their homeland by the Nabateans between 550 and 400 <span>BC<\/span>, and they never regained their territory. Through the judgment of Edom, God demonstrated that he is the great Ruler over the nations (Mal 1:5) and that he will not forget Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Unacceptable Sacrifices of the Priests (1:6-14)<\/h5>\n<p>Although God deserved the honor and reverence of the Israelites, both the people and the priests openly disdained his laws and regulations. Strangely, it was the priests who led the way into disobedience. Sacrifices and offerings were supposed to atone for sin, but the animals offered by the priests only served to pollute or defile the altar (1:7, 12). According to Leviticus, animals with defects were unacceptable as sacrifices, but Malachi mentions that the priests were offering to the Lord animals that were stolen and mutilated, crippled and sick (v 13; cf. v 8). To emphasize their contempt, the Lord challenged the priests to bring comparable presents to the governor. Would they dare to insult him in this fashion and face sure rejection? Rather than having the priests continue to bring unfit sacrifices to the altar, the Lord asked them to close the temple doors entirely (v 10). Going through the motions never pleased God, either in ancient times (cf. Is 1:12-13) or modern. By calling the altar and its sacrifices “contemptible” (Mal 1:7, 12), the priests were no better than the wicked sons of Eli, whose disregard of the rules for sacrifices sent them to a premature death (cf. 1 Sm 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>In sharp contrast to the attitude of the priests stands the emphasis upon God’s greatness in Malachi 1:11 and 14. God is more powerful than the gods of other nations, and even if Israel’s priests and people dishonor the Lord, eventually pure offerings will be brought to God by believing Gentiles. Perhaps these offerings refer to prayer and praise (cf. Ps 19:14; Heb 13:15; Rv 5:8), but others interpret the reference more literally (cf. Is 56:7; 60:7). Peter may be alluding to this verse in connection with the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:35).<\/p>\n<h5>The Punishment of the Priests (2:1-9)<\/h5>\n<p>One of the functions of the priests was to pronounce blessings upon the people in the name of God, but their disgraceful behavior turned the blessings into curses (Mal 2:2). Because of the priests’ sinfulness and the poor condition of the animals, their sacrifices were also worthless, and the entrails of the animals will be spread on their faces as a sign that God holds them in contempt. The disgrace heaped upon the priests differs sharply from the honor enjoyed by Aaron and his descendants. Malachi refers to a covenant of life and peace (v 5) made with Levi and more particularly with Aaron’s grandson Phinehas, who courageously took action against the Jews involved in idolatry and immorality (Nm 25:10-13). In those days the priests revered the Lord and turned many from sin (Mal 2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Another responsibility of the priests was to teach the nation the law handed down by Moses (cf. Lv 10:11). Like prophets, they were messengers of the Lord (Mal 2:7) who were supposed to walk close to the Lord, but now the priests disregarded the law and were dishonest in handing down judicial decisions (Mal 2:9; cf. Lv 19:15).<\/p>\n<h5>The Unfaithfulness of the People (2:10-16)<\/h5>\n<p>In light of the attitude of the priests, it is not surprising to discover that the people at large were unfaithful to the Lord. God had formed Israel to be his special people, but the people had broken faith with him. A major factor in their unfaithfulness was intermarriage with foreigners, a sin mentioned in Ezra 9:1-2 and Nehemiah 13:23-29. By marrying pagan women, the men of Israel invariably began to worship pagan gods and turn from the Lord. When such intermarriage occurred, it sometimes followed the divorce of an Israelite wife. In Malachi 2:14-15 God underscores the sacred commitment that he himself witnesses when two people marry. If that marriage covenant is shattered by divorce, God is deeply displeased. And it is even more tragic if divorce became an excuse to marry a more attractive or appealing foreigner.<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Messenger of the Covenant (2:17–3:5)<\/h5>\n<p>The sins of the priests and the people did not go unnoticed, even though the nation doubted that God would take action (2:17). But the third chapter opens with the announcement that the messenger of the covenant will indeed come to his temple. His way will be prepared by another messenger—a prophecy of John the Baptist, who prepared the way for the ministry of Christ (cf. Mt 11:10; Mk 1:2-3). When Christ came, he revealed his anger when he cleansed the temple (cf. Jn 2:13-17) and denounced the scribes and Pharisees (cf. 9:39), but most of his purifying and refining work awaits the Second Coming. Someday the priests and Levites will bring acceptable sacrifices, as they did in the days of Moses and Phinehas (cf. Mal 3:3-4 and 2:4-5). Verse 5 of chapter 3 broadens the scope of the judgment to include the whole nation, as sorcerers, adulterers, and those who oppress the poor are condemned.<\/p>\n<h5>The Benefits of Faithful Tithing (3:6-12)<\/h5>\n<p>Another specific weakness of postexilic Judah was the failure of the people to bring their tithes to the Lord. Encouraged by Nehemiah, the nation promised to tithe faithfully (cf. Neh 10:37-39), but apparently their good intentions were short-lived (cf. 13:10-11). According to Malachi 3:8-9, the tithes of the nation were so dismal that the people were, in effect, robbing God and were therefore under a curse. In verses 10-12 Malachi challenges the nation to bring their tithes; then God would pour out his blessing upon them. Just as the opening of the “windows in heaven” meant the end of a famine in 2 Kings 7:2, 19, so God promises that their crops will be so abundant that they will run out of storage space. The hope of “blessing” in Malachi 3:10 and 12 provides welcome relief from the curses mentioned in 1:14, 2:2, 3:9, and 4:6.<\/p>\n<h5>The Day of the Lord (3:13–4:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Faced with the challenge of Malachi 3:10-12, the people of Israel responded in two different ways. One group denied that serving God brought any benefit (3:13-15), while another segment of the nation bowed low before him with deep reverence (vv 16-18). The unbelievers argued that obeying the Lord was useless and that arrogant and evil people were the ones who prospered. In response to their charge, Malachi noted that God would remember who the righteous were in the Day of Judgment. Although all of Israel was included in the promise made to Abraham, only those who genuinely believed would be God’s treasured possession (3:17; cf. Ex 19:5), with their names written in the Book of Life (cf. Mal 3:16). As for the arrogant and evildoers, the Day of the Lord will consume them and they will have no survivors (4:1). Those who revere the Lord will enjoy spiritual and physical health under the blessing and protection of God, who is called the “sun of righteousness” (v 2). Like calves just released from confinement, the righteous will trample down the wicked and triumph over them (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>In view of the judgment associated with the Day of the Lord, Malachi urged the people to repent. To do this they needed to heed the law of Moses and take seriously the decrees and commands given at Mt Sinai (4:4; cf. 3:7). Just as Elijah called on Israel to turn back to God, so a new “Elijah” will preach repentance to a rebellious nation. When John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ (cf. Mal 3:1), he ministered “in the spirit and power of Elijah” and begged the Jews to turn from their sin and humble themselves before God (Lk 1:17). If they refused to listen, the nation faced the prospect of total destruction, the curse placed upon the people of Canaan (cf. Jos 6:17-19) and upon the nation of Edom, whose collapse was described in Malachi 1:2-5.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MALACHI, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Yet it would be most unusual for the Jews to preserve a prophetic book without explicitly attaching to it the name of the author. All of the other major and minor prophets—including Obadiah—are named after a particular prophet. Moreover, “messenger of the Lord” would be a most appropriate name for a prophet (cf. 2 Chr 36:15-16; Hg 1:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>During the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, the struggling Jewish community in Judah was greatly assisted by the return of Ezra and Nehemiah. In 458 <span>BC<\/span> Ezra was encouraged by King Artaxerxes of Persia to lead a group of exiles back to Jerusalem and to institute religious reform. About 13 years later, in 445 <span>BC<\/span>, a high-ranking government official named Nehemiah was allowed to go to Jerusalem to rebuild the city walls, a task he accomplished in 52 days (Neh 6:15). As governor, Nehemiah led the people in a financial reform that provided for the poor and encouraged tithing to support the priests and Levites (5:2-13; 10:35-39). Like Ezra, Nehemiah urged the people to keep the Sabbath and avoid intermarrying with pagan neighbors. After a 12-year term, Nehemiah returned to Persia and the spiritual condition of Judah deteriorated. Perhaps discouraged by their lack of political power, tithing became sporadic, the Sabbath was not kept, intermarriage was common, and even the priests could not be trusted. When Nehemiah came back to Jerusalem sometime later, he had to take firm action to straighten out the situation (13:6-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Since Malachi had to deal with the same sins mentioned in Nehemiah 13 (see Mal 1:6-14; 2:14-16; 3:8-11), it is likely that the prophet ministered either during Nehemiah’s second term as governor or in the years just before his return. The reference to “the governor” in Malachi 1:8 implies that someone other than Nehemiah was in office, so it may be best to place Malachi just after 433 <span>BC<\/span>, the year Nehemiah had returned to Persia.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheology\">Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>Malachi was written to shake the people of Judah from their spiritual lethargy and to warn them that judgment was coming unless they repented. The people doubted God’s love (1:2) and justice (2:17) and did not take his commands seriously (1:6; 3:14-18). Yet God was “a great King” (1:14) with a great name that was to be feared even beyond the border of Israel (vv 5, 11). Malachi repeatedly urged both the priests and the people to revere God and give him the honor he deserved. God was Israel’s Father and Creator (2:10), but the nation showed contempt for his name (1:6; 3:5). In response to this contempt, God would send his messenger to announce the Day of the Lord (3:1). John the Baptist did call the nation to repentance, and Christ came to cleanse the temple (Jn 2:14-15) and to establish the covenant (Mal 3:1-2). Most of the work of refining and purifying will take place at the Second Coming, when Christ returns to purify his people (cf. vv 2-4) and judge the wicked (4:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Great Love for Israel (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>To introduce the book, Malachi presents a contrast between God’s love for Israel and his hatred for Edom. Yet the assertion of God’s love is greeted with a strange question: “How have you loved us?” God loved Israel by entering into a covenant with the nation at Mt Sinai, just after he had freed them from the prison of Egypt. He had chosen them as his special people (cf. Gn 12:1-3; Ex 19:5-6), whereas the descendants of Esau were not chosen (cf. Rom 9:10-13). Both Israel and Edom endured invasion and destruction, but only Israel was restored and rebuilt after the exile. The people of Edom were driven from their homeland by the Nabateans between 550 and 400 <span>BC<\/span>, and they never regained their territory. Through the judgment of Edom, God demonstrated that he is the great Ruler over the nations (Mal 1:5) and that he will not forget Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Unacceptable Sacrifices of the Priests (1:6-14)<\/h5>\n<p>Although God deserved the honor and reverence of the Israelites, both the people and the priests openly disdained his laws and regulations. Strangely, it was the priests who led the way into disobedience. Sacrifices and offerings were supposed to atone for sin, but the animals offered by the priests only served to pollute or defile the altar (1:7, 12). According to Leviticus, animals with defects were unacceptable as sacrifices, but Malachi mentions that the priests were offering to the Lord animals that were stolen and mutilated, crippled and sick (v 13; cf. v 8). To emphasize their contempt, the Lord challenged the priests to bring comparable presents to the governor. Would they dare to insult him in this fashion and face sure rejection? Rather than having the priests continue to bring unfit sacrifices to the altar, the Lord asked them to close the temple doors entirely (v 10). Going through the motions never pleased God, either in ancient times (cf. Is 1:12-13) or modern. By calling the altar and its sacrifices “contemptible” (Mal 1:7, 12), the priests were no better than the wicked sons of Eli, whose disregard of the rules for sacrifices sent them to a premature death (cf. 1 Sm 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>In sharp contrast to the attitude of the priests stands the emphasis upon God’s greatness in Malachi 1:11 and 14. God is more powerful than the gods of other nations, and even if Israel’s priests and people dishonor the Lord, eventually pure offerings will be brought to God by believing Gentiles. Perhaps these offerings refer to prayer and praise (cf. Ps 19:14; Heb 13:15; Rv 5:8), but others interpret the reference more literally (cf. Is 56:7; 60:7). Peter may be alluding to this verse in connection with the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:35).<\/p>\n<h5>The Punishment of the Priests (2:1-9)<\/h5>\n<p>One of the functions of the priests was to pronounce blessings upon the people in the name of God, but their disgraceful behavior turned the blessings into curses (Mal 2:2). Because of the priests’ sinfulness and the poor condition of the animals, their sacrifices were also worthless, and the entrails of the animals will be spread on their faces as a sign that God holds them in contempt. The disgrace heaped upon the priests differs sharply from the honor enjoyed by Aaron and his descendants. Malachi refers to a covenant of life and peace (v 5) made with Levi and more particularly with Aaron’s grandson Phinehas, who courageously took action against the Jews involved in idolatry and immorality (Nm 25:10-13). In those days the priests revered the Lord and turned many from sin (Mal 2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Another responsibility of the priests was to teach the nation the law handed down by Moses (cf. Lv 10:11). Like prophets, they were messengers of the Lord (Mal 2:7) who were supposed to walk close to the Lord, but now the priests disregarded the law and were dishonest in handing down judicial decisions (Mal 2:9; cf. Lv 19:15).<\/p>\n<h5>The Unfaithfulness of the People (2:10-16)<\/h5>\n<p>In light of the attitude of the priests, it is not surprising to discover that the people at large were unfaithful to the Lord. God had formed Israel to be his special people, but the people had broken faith with him. A major factor in their unfaithfulness was intermarriage with foreigners, a sin mentioned in Ezra 9:1-2 and Nehemiah 13:23-29. By marrying pagan women, the men of Israel invariably began to worship pagan gods and turn from the Lord. When such intermarriage occurred, it sometimes followed the divorce of an Israelite wife. In Malachi 2:14-15 God underscores the sacred commitment that he himself witnesses when two people marry. If that marriage covenant is shattered by divorce, God is deeply displeased. And it is even more tragic if divorce became an excuse to marry a more attractive or appealing foreigner.<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Messenger of the Covenant (2:17–3:5)<\/h5>\n<p>The sins of the priests and the people did not go unnoticed, even though the nation doubted that God would take action (2:17). But the third chapter opens with the announcement that the messenger of the covenant will indeed come to his temple. His way will be prepared by another messenger—a prophecy of John the Baptist, who prepared the way for the ministry of Christ (cf. Mt 11:10; Mk 1:2-3). When Christ came, he revealed his anger when he cleansed the temple (cf. Jn 2:13-17) and denounced the scribes and Pharisees (cf. 9:39), but most of his purifying and refining work awaits the Second Coming. Someday the priests and Levites will bring acceptable sacrifices, as they did in the days of Moses and Phinehas (cf. Mal 3:3-4 and 2:4-5). Verse 5 of chapter 3 broadens the scope of the judgment to include the whole nation, as sorcerers, adulterers, and those who oppress the poor are condemned.<\/p>\n<h5>The Benefits of Faithful Tithing (3:6-12)<\/h5>\n<p>Another specific weakness of postexilic Judah was the failure of the people to bring their tithes to the Lord. Encouraged by Nehemiah, the nation promised to tithe faithfully (cf. Neh 10:37-39), but apparently their good intentions were short-lived (cf. 13:10-11). According to Malachi 3:8-9, the tithes of the nation were so dismal that the people were, in effect, robbing God and were therefore under a curse. In verses 10-12 Malachi challenges the nation to bring their tithes; then God would pour out his blessing upon them. Just as the opening of the “windows in heaven” meant the end of a famine in 2 Kings 7:2, 19, so God promises that their crops will be so abundant that they will run out of storage space. The hope of “blessing” in Malachi 3:10 and 12 provides welcome relief from the curses mentioned in 1:14, 2:2, 3:9, and 4:6.<\/p>\n<h5>The Day of the Lord (3:13–4:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Faced with the challenge of Malachi 3:10-12, the people of Israel responded in two different ways. One group denied that serving God brought any benefit (3:13-15), while another segment of the nation bowed low before him with deep reverence (vv 16-18). The unbelievers argued that obeying the Lord was useless and that arrogant and evil people were the ones who prospered. In response to their charge, Malachi noted that God would remember who the righteous were in the Day of Judgment. Although all of Israel was included in the promise made to Abraham, only those who genuinely believed would be God’s treasured possession (3:17; cf. Ex 19:5), with their names written in the Book of Life (cf. Mal 3:16). As for the arrogant and evildoers, the Day of the Lord will consume them and they will have no survivors (4:1). Those who revere the Lord will enjoy spiritual and physical health under the blessing and protection of God, who is called the “sun of righteousness” (v 2). Like calves just released from confinement, the righteous will trample down the wicked and triumph over them (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>In view of the judgment associated with the Day of the Lord, Malachi urged the people to repent. To do this they needed to heed the law of Moses and take seriously the decrees and commands given at Mt Sinai (4:4; cf. 3:7). Just as Elijah called on Israel to turn back to God, so a new “Elijah” will preach repentance to a rebellious nation. When John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ (cf. Mal 3:1), he ministered “in the spirit and power of Elijah” and begged the Jews to turn from their sin and humble themselves before God (Lk 1:17). If they refused to listen, the nation faced the prospect of total destruction, the curse placed upon the people of Canaan (cf. Jos 6:17-19) and upon the nation of Edom, whose collapse was described in Malachi 1:2-5.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MALACHI, Book of Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament. Preview • Author • Background • Date • Purpose and Theology • Content Author The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah....","summary_en":"MALACHI, Book of Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament. Preview • Author • Background • Date • Purpose and Theology • Content Author The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah....","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26215,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Money Changer","title_en":"Money Changer","content_ro":"<h3>MONEY CHANGER<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient profession that undertook many of the services performed by the modern banker, particularly in the area of exchanging the currency of one country or province into that of another, or of exchanging small coins for coins of greater value or vice versa. Naturally, a fee was charged for such a service.<\/p>\n<p>Standardized coinage as such does not go back beyond the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. In earlier periods pieces of silver were weighed out in payment for commodities (Gn 20:16; 37:28; Jgs 17:2). Once the standardized coin was adopted in Asia Minor the idea was copied in other lands, but since coins differed from country to country, equivalents had to be worked out by the money changers.<\/p>\n<p>The need for such procedures was particularly important in Palestine, where every adult male Jew had to pay a half-shekel offering (Ex 30:11-16). Jews from various countries who came to pay this sum might bring a variety of types of coinage. Temple authorities had to authorize a coin appropriate for the purpose. This was the silver Tyrian half-shekel or tetradrachma (cf. Mt 17:27, where Peter was told to pay the temple tax for Jesus and himself with the coin he found in the mouth of a fish). The Mishnah states (<em>Sheqalim<\/em> 1:3) that money changers operated in the provinces on the 15th of the month of Adar (the month before the Passover) to collect this tax. Ten days before the Passover the money changers moved to the temple courts to assist Jews from foreign countries.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus encountered the money changers in the temple courtyard when he “cleansed the temple” (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-16; Lk 19:45-46; Jn 2:13-22). The reason for this action has been a matter of debate. Worshipers needed to procure the half-shekel to pay their tax. But they needed also to purchase birds, animals, or cake offerings in some cases. This wholesale activity in buying and money changing seemed inappropriate in the temple precincts, which constituted a sacred area (cf. Mk 11:16), although Jesus evidently approved the payment of the temple tax as such (Mt 8:4; 17:24-26; Mk 1:44; Lk 5:14). There is also the possibility that the charge made by money changers and by those who sold sacrificial birds and animals was exorbitant, whether for their own profit or for the profit of the temple authorities. Such operations could be carried on at a suitable distance from the sacred area so that the haggling and noise associated with such activities in an Eastern setting did not unnecessarily disturb the prayer and the offering of sacrifices carried on in the temple courts (cf. Jer 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Coins; Money.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MONEY CHANGER<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient profession that undertook many of the services performed by the modern banker, particularly in the area of exchanging the currency of one country or province into that of another, or of exchanging small coins for coins of greater value or vice versa. Naturally, a fee was charged for such a service.<\/p>\n<p>Standardized coinage as such does not go back beyond the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. In earlier periods pieces of silver were weighed out in payment for commodities (Gn 20:16; 37:28; Jgs 17:2). Once the standardized coin was adopted in Asia Minor the idea was copied in other lands, but since coins differed from country to country, equivalents had to be worked out by the money changers.<\/p>\n<p>The need for such procedures was particularly important in Palestine, where every adult male Jew had to pay a half-shekel offering (Ex 30:11-16). Jews from various countries who came to pay this sum might bring a variety of types of coinage. Temple authorities had to authorize a coin appropriate for the purpose. This was the silver Tyrian half-shekel or tetradrachma (cf. Mt 17:27, where Peter was told to pay the temple tax for Jesus and himself with the coin he found in the mouth of a fish). The Mishnah states (<em>Sheqalim<\/em> 1:3) that money changers operated in the provinces on the 15th of the month of Adar (the month before the Passover) to collect this tax. Ten days before the Passover the money changers moved to the temple courts to assist Jews from foreign countries.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus encountered the money changers in the temple courtyard when he “cleansed the temple” (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-16; Lk 19:45-46; Jn 2:13-22). The reason for this action has been a matter of debate. Worshipers needed to procure the half-shekel to pay their tax. But they needed also to purchase birds, animals, or cake offerings in some cases. This wholesale activity in buying and money changing seemed inappropriate in the temple precincts, which constituted a sacred area (cf. Mk 11:16), although Jesus evidently approved the payment of the temple tax as such (Mt 8:4; 17:24-26; Mk 1:44; Lk 5:14). There is also the possibility that the charge made by money changers and by those who sold sacrificial birds and animals was exorbitant, whether for their own profit or for the profit of the temple authorities. Such operations could be carried on at a suitable distance from the sacred area so that the haggling and noise associated with such activities in an Eastern setting did not unnecessarily disturb the prayer and the offering of sacrifices carried on in the temple courts (cf. Jer 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Coins; Money.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MONEY CHANGER Ancient profession that undertook many of the services performed by the modern banker, particularly in the area of exchanging the currency of one country or province into that of another, or of exchanging small coins for coins of greater value or vice versa. Naturally, a fee was charged for such a service. Standardized coinage as such does not go back beyond the seventh century BC. In earlier periods pieces of silver were weighed out in payment for commodities (Gn 20:16; 37:28; ...","summary_en":"MONEY CHANGER Ancient profession that undertook many of the services performed by the modern banker, particularly in the area of exchanging the currency of one country or province into that of another, or of exchanging small coins for coins of greater value or vice versa. Naturally, a fee was charged for such a service. Standardized coinage as such does not go back beyond the seventh century BC. In earlier periods pieces of silver were weighed out in payment for commodities (Gn 20:16; 37:28; ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37072,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Temple","title_en":"Temple","content_ro":"<h3>TEMPLE<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Solomon’s Temple<\/p>\n<p>• Zerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n<p>• Herod’s Temple<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>David’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptable to both. Jerusalem was then established as the national religious center by the return of the ark, which had been largely neglected since its capture by the Philistines (2 Sm 6:1-17). Henceforth, God’s choices of both David and Jerusalem (“Mount Zion”) were indissolubly linked (Ps 78:67-72).<\/p>\n<p>David’s great impulse was to build an adequate dwelling place for Israel’s God. The idea was initially approved by Nathan the prophet (2 Sm 7:1-3), but God revealed otherwise to him, and he conveyed the divine purpose to David (vv 4-17). In a significant wordplay, David was informed that, while he was not to build a house (temple) for God, God would build a house (dynasty) for him. David was not the one to build a temple because of the numerous wars during his reign; the temple would instead be built by his son (1 Kgs 5:3; 1 Chr 22:7-8; 28:3). Nevertheless, David enthusiastically amassed most of the necessary finances and materials and drew up the blueprints for the temple (1 Chr 22:3-5, 14; 28:2, 11-19). He also purchased the temple site (21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SolomonsTemple\">Solomon’s Temple<\/p>\n\n<h5>Date<\/h5>\n<p>Construction commenced in Solomon’s fourth year, about 966 <span>BC<\/span>, and took seven years to complete (1 Kgs 6:1, 38). Everything necessary for the temple, including the workers, had been prepared by David (1 Chr 28:21). The temple evidently had first priority among Solomon’s building schemes, as he built his own palace later (1 Kgs 7:1).<\/p>\n<h5>Superintendents and Workforce<\/h5>\n<p>The principal architect for the bronze furnishings was Huram (Hebrew “Hiram”), whose father was a metal craftsman from Tyre and whose mother was an Israelite (1 Kgs 7:13-14). Cedar for the temple came from Lebanon and was felled and transported by the skilled woodsmen of another Hiram—the king of Tyre, Solomon’s ally (5:5-9). Thirty thousand Israelites, divided into three groups, were drafted to assist at Lebanon. Each group was on duty for one month in three. For the stonework, Solomon conscripted 153,600 foreigners resident in Israel to provide a self-contained group of carriers, stone cutters, and supervisors (vv 15-17; 2 Chr 2:17-18). Possibly the “men of Gebal,” with their specialized skills, formed yet another group (1 Kgs 5:18). Building the temple was obviously a national project of immense size and effort. In order to preserve the sanctity of the site and to eliminate noise, the masonry and carpentry were not done at the temple site (6:7).<\/p>\n<h5>Description<\/h5>\n<p>The details given in the Bible are sufficiently clear for us to make a reasonably accurate description of the temple. The accounts in Kings and Chronicles are supplemented by Ezekiel’s depiction of the temple (see below), which was broadly based on his knowledge of the Jerusalem temple (Ez 40–48).<\/p>\n<p>The side rooms probably rested on a foundation or platform that was separate from the temple itself (1 Kgs 6:5, 10; cf. Ez 41:8-9) and were arranged in three stories, each seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high, extending around the whole building except for the porch side. Each successive story was one and a half feet (.5 meter) wider than the one below, these dimensions coinciding with the thickness of the side wall of the Holy Place. The ground floor rooms were seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) wide; the first story was nine feet (2.7 meters), and the second was ten and a half feet (3.2 meters). Access to the upper stories was possibly by winding staircases (1 Kgs 6:8). There is some uncertainty concerning the location of the entrances; there may have been one on either side, but only one is mentioned (v 8). As in Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 40:17, 28), there were two adjacent courts, an inner and an outer (1 Kgs 6:36; 7:12), but no dimensions are given for these. The inner court, or “court of the priests,” being next to the temple itself, was also called “the upper court” (2 Chr 4:9; Jer 36:10). The wall of the inner court was made of three layers of hewn stone held together by a layer of cedar beams (1 Kgs 6:36), and the doors of both courts were sheathed in bronze (2 Chr 4:9). The palace buildings were within the outer court area, probably with a private passageway between the palace and the temple that was later closed during the reign of Ahaz (2 Chr 4:9, 12; 2 Kgs 16:18).<\/p>\n<p>The temple itself was 90 feet (27.4 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 45 feet (13.7 meters) high (1 Kgs 6:2), with a porch or vestibule 15 feet (4.6 meters) deep stretching across the width. Probably the vestibule was on the east end of the temple, thus corresponding with the orientation of Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 43:1; 44:1). The larger part of the main sanctuary, next to the porch, formed the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long (1 Kgs 6:17). Beyond this was the innermost sanctuary, the Holy of Holies (or the “Most Holy Place“), which was a perfect cube of 30 feet (9.1 meters). All the interior walls were paneled with cedar decorated with flower patterns, cherubim, and palm trees, so that no masonry was visible. The walls of both inner and outer sanctuaries were “overlaid” (v 22) with pure gold. Actually the gold decoration may have been inlaid, on the basis that a solid sheath of gold would spoil the natural beauty of the wood carving. The floor was made of cypress planks (v 15). Narrow windows set high in the walls above the level of the three-storied outer chambers provided light in the Holy Place (v 4). The ceiling was paneled with beams and planks of cedar. No detail is given about the exterior roofing, but probably the contemporary technique was employed, using a wooden, latticelike framework into which a waterproof, limestone plaster was packed and rolled.<\/p>\n<p>The outer porch was apparently an open space, since no doors are mentioned. Access into the Holy Place was by double doors, both hinged to fold back on themselves, made of cypress and decorated in exactly the same way as the interior walls (vv 34-35). The doorposts were made of olive wood. Within the Holy Place was the altar of incense made of cedar overlaid with gold; it was placed centrally before the Holy of Holies. Also in the Holy Place were a table for the bread of the Presence of God, ten lampstands arranged in two groups of five on either side, and various utensils required for maintaining the priestly duties (1 Kgs 7:48-50). All these were made or overlaid with gold. The ten tables, arranged five on each side, were presumably for the utensils and accessories (2 Chr 4:8).<\/p>\n<p>Between the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies was a double door made of olive wood, carved with cherubim, palm trees, and flower patterns and overlaid with gold. Inside these doors, veiling still further the Holy of Holies, was a blue, purple, and crimson curtain, made of the finest fabrics and ornamented with cherubim (2 Chr 3:14).<\/p>\n<p>In the Holy of Holies were two cherubim, each 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and made of olive wood covered with gold (1 Kgs 6:23-28). Each wing measured seven and a half feet (2.3 meters). A wing of each touched the side walls; the other wings met at the center of the room. The divine throne had been considerably less impressive in the tabernacle, where a wing of each cherubim fused into the mercy seat above the ark (Ex 25:17-22). In Solomon’s temple, the ark of the covenant was placed below the forward-facing cherubim, the symbolic protectors. The ark, the only major item surviving from the Mosaic tabernacle, still contained the tablets of the law, but the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod were missing (1 Kgs 8:9).<\/p>\n<p>Immediately outside the temple and on either side of the vestibule were two hollow bronze pillars (1 Kgs 7:15-20; 2 Chr 3:15-17). According to the book of Kings, these pillars were 27 feet (8.2 meters) high, with a circumference of 18 feet (5.5 meters). The metal itself was about four inches (10.2 centimeters) thick. The pillars were surmounted by bronze, lily-shaped capitals seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high and six feet (1.8 meters) wide, intricately adorned with a chain latticework that supported two rows of pomegranates. The total weight must have been enormous, and their size is attested to by Jeremiah, who notes that the Babylonians had to break them in pieces before transporting them to Babylon (Jer 52:17, 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The bronze altar of sacrifice in front of the vestibule is not listed in the specifications of 1 Kings 7. However, it is mentioned in the temple dedication and subsequently (1 Kgs 8:22, 54, 64; 9:25) and clearly stood in the inner court. Its dimensions were 30 feet (9.1 meters) square and 15 feet (4.6 meters) high (2 Chr 4:1). In view of its weight, it was probably cast in sections at Solomon’s foundry in the Jordan Rift valley (vv 17-18) and then transported to the temple site for assembly.<\/p>\n<p>Probably the most striking article in the inner court was the “molten (bronze) sea,” a huge, round tank made of bronze 3 inches (8 centimeters) thick, 7½ feet (2.3 meters) high, and 15 feet (4.6 meters) in diameter (1 Kgs 7:23-26). Its rim flared out like a lily (2 Chr 4:2-5). The tank was supported on 12 bronze oxen, four on each side, and had two rows of decoration, possibly gourds or pomegranates, under the brim. Its capacity was between 10,000 and 12,000 gallons (37,850–45,420 liters). The bronze sea was used for priestly ablutions (v 6). Presumably this involved a platform of sorts, for the brim of this vast basin would have been about 15 feet (4.6 meters) above ground level.<\/p>\n<p>Hiram also constructed ten large lavers, mounted on moveable stands and placed in two groups of five, on the north and south sides of the inner court (1 Kgs 7:27-39). Basically the stands were bronze boxes, six feet (1.8 meters) square and four and a half feet (1.4 meters) high with a nine-inch (22.9-centimeter) rim around the top edge. Each corner was attached to braced posts to which the axles were fixed. The four-spoked wheels were 27 inches (68.6 centimeters) high. Into each stand there fitted a laver containing approximately 220 gallons (832.7 liters) of water, used for washing sacrificial animals (2 Chr 4:6). Probably each was adjacent to one of the ten tables that would be used to flay and otherwise prepare the sacrifices (v 8). Supplementary items, such as pots, shovels, and basins, all made of bronze, were also manufactured (1 Kgs 7:40, 45).<\/p>\n<h5>The Dedication<\/h5>\n<p>Eleven months elapsed between the completion of the temple and its dedication (1 Kgs 6:38; 8:2), during which time the major items of furniture were set in place. The dedication itself took place in the seventh month, presumably in connection with the Feast of Tabernacles and the Day of Atonement (Lv 23:23-36). The ark of the covenant was brought into its final resting place (1 Kgs 8:3-4), but the inner court proved inadequate for the vast numbers of beasts sacrificed (1 Kgs 8:62-64; 2 Chr 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>The temple employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense had been spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Yet Solomon readily confessed its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27). His prayer also underlined Israel’s propensity to forsake the Lord, contrasting the nation with God, who, though a just judge, was also merciful and faithful. The climax of the proceedings came when fire from heaven consumed the sacrifices and the shekinah glory filled the temple (2 Chr 7:1-3).<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\n<p>Like most ancient shrines, the temple became a treasury for national wealth and as such was often the target for attack. Shishak of Egypt plundered it within five years of Solomon’s death (1 Kgs 14:25-38). Shortly afterward, King Asa (910–869 <span>BC<\/span>) depleted its gold and silver treasures to buy Syrian help against his oppressor, Baasha (908–886 <span>BC<\/span>), king of Israel (15:16-19). Joash, the king of Judah (835–796 <span>BC<\/span>) who was concealed in the temple from the vicious Athaliah during his youth (2 Kgs 11), made provision for its repair after protesting the priests’ embezzlement of gifts (12:4-16). But after the death of Jehoiada, the high priest, Joash himself was adversely influenced by his nobles (2 Chr 24:15-19). As punishment for his apostasy, the Lord allowed the Syrians to attack, and Joash used the temple treasures to buy them off (2 Kgs 12:17-18). Hardly had provision for replacements been made, when Jehoash of Israel (798–782 <span>BC<\/span>), having shattered the arrogant pride of Amaziah of Judah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>), again stripped the temple (14:8-14). Later, King Ahaz (735-715 <span>BC<\/span>) used the remaining resources of the temple to enlist support from the Assyrians (16:7-9), though he eventually became completely subservient to them.<\/p>\n<p> Then Hezekiah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>), one of the great reforming kings, thoroughly renovated the temple and restored worship after it had fallen into disuse during theclosing years of Ahaz (2 Chr 29:1-19; 31:9-21). Manasseh (696–642 <span>BC<\/span>), however, completely reversed his father’s policy, bringing the practices of Canaanite and Mesopotamian worship into the temple (2 Kgs 21:3-7). His conversion experience, which probably occurred late in his reign and resulted in certain reform measures in the temple (2 Chr 33:12-19), was not far-reaching enough to escape the final judgment that his reign was the dark spot of Judah’s history (2 Kgs 21:10-16).<\/p>\n<p>Manasseh’s grandson Josiah (640–609 <span>BC<\/span>), was the second great reforming king. He organized the repair of the temple in 622 <span>BC<\/span>, during which the lost Book of the Law (almost certainly the book of Deuteronomy) was discovered (2 Kgs 22:3-13). As a result, Josiah’s reformation gained a new dimension and sense of urgency (22:14–23:3). The reformation included a thorough purge of all idolatrous elements from the temple (23:4-12) and the restoration of the traditional festivals. Sadly, however, Josiah’s reformation died with him, and Judah’s downward slide continued under the apostate Jehoiakim (609–598 <span>BC<\/span>). It was probably during this time that Jeremiah preached his famous temple sermon foretelling its destruction (Jer 7:1–8:3; 26:1-19), which alienated him from the religious leaders. In Nebuchadnezzar’s reprisal raid following Jehoiakim’s rebellion in 601 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:1-4), Jerusalem was captured (596 <span>BC<\/span>) and many of the temple treasures were transported to Babylon (2 Chr 36:7). The temple itself appears to have escaped damage, but when Judah again rebelled under Zedekiah (597–586 <span>BC<\/span>), the temple was demolished (2 Kgs 25:8-10). The remaining temple treasures were taken away.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ZerubbabelsTemple\">Zerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n<h5>Construction<\/h5>\n<p>Although the temple was devastated, the site still remained as a place of pilgrimage during the exile (Jer 41:4-5). In 538 <span>BC<\/span> the Persian king, Cyrus, in pursuance of a liberal policy diametrically opposed to that of the earlier empires, permitted the Jews to return from exile. And he authorized the rebuilding of the temple, financing it from the Persian treasury.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Ezra, the decree of authorization has been preserved in two forms: the general proclamation (Ezr 1:2-4) and a more prosaic memorandum in the national archives indicating the main temple specifications and the amount of promised Persian help (6:1-5). Probably only a minority of the Jews opted to leave the relative comforts of Mesopotamia for the dangers of a long journey to their desolated homeland. According to the book of Ezra, 42,360 dedicated individuals and their servants (2:64-65) responded under the leadership of Sheshbazzar (1:8-11; 5:14-16) and Zerubbabel (2:2; 3:2, 8; 4:2). With great enthusiasm, the altar was rebuilt on the temple site and the traditional pattern of worship reestablished (3:1-6). Utilizing the grant from Persia as well as their own freewill gifts (2:68-69; 3:7), the Jews began to plan the second temple and lay its foundations (3:7-13). The initial impetus quickly died as a result of local opposition (4:1-4, 24), selfish preoccupation, and crop failures (Hg 1:2-11). In 520 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), inspired by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the Jews under Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest commenced rebuilding. Work continued in spite of official suspicion, if not direct opposition, and the temple was completed and dedicated in 515 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1–6:22).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of the physical features of Zerubbabel’s temple. The inference that it was vastly inferior to Solomon’s temple (Hg 2:3) probably relates to an early stage in the building operation. In fact, the second temple stood for over 500 years. The dimensions noted in Ezra 6:3 are incomplete; the new temple was no doubt about the same size as its predecessor and was probably built on the same foundation. The construction technique appears to have followed the method of the original, with layers of timber providing a framework for sections of masonry (v 4). Clearly, there was auxiliary accommodation, probably like the side rooms of Solomon’s temple (Ezr 8:29; Neh 12:44; 13:4-5). If Persian aid was forthcoming as promised (Ezr 6:8-12), the second temple was a more splendid, substantial structure than is generally supposed.<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\n<p>Several references in the Apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, rabbinic writings, and the historian Josephus help to illumine the history of the temple and give more detail on its structure and furnishings. Josephus, quoting from Hecateus of Abdera (fourth century <span>BC<\/span>), states that the temple was a large building in an enclosure about 500 feet by 150 feet (152.4 meters by 45.7 meters), surrounded by a stone wall, with an altar of unhewn stones the same size as Solomon’s bronze altar (cf. 2 Chr 4:1). Within the sanctuary was a golden altar of incense and a lampstand, the flame of which burned continually. Josephus also notes that Antiochus III (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>) financially supported the temple when the Seleucids displaced the Ptolemies as masters of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Ben Sirach, early in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, commended Simon, the son of Onias the high priest, for his work in fortifying and repairing the temple area. First Maccabees provides valuable evidence of the fate of the temple during the oppression under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 <span>BC<\/span>). The books of the Maccabees recount the defilement of the altar of burnt offering (1 Macc 1:54) and the plundering of the golden lampstand, altar of incense, table of offering, veil, and other treasures (2 Macc 5:15-16; 6:2-4). When the temple was recaptured and restored, the victorious Maccabees replaced the items taken by the Seleucids, except for the altar of sacrifice, which was considered so polluted that it was dismantled and replaced by a new one constructed of unhewn stone (1 Macc 4:36-61; 2 Macc 10:1-9). Clearly the temple area was used as a fortress, both in opposition to the Seleucid garrison that was maintained in Jerusalem in the Maccabean period and in the conflicts of the later Hasmonean period. When Pompey captured Jerusalem about 63 <span>BC<\/span>, he entered the temple to assert his authority but took no plunder, thus showing respect for it.<\/p>\n<p>The history of Zerubbabel’s temple closed when Herod, having carefully preserved it from any major damage when he gained control of Jerusalem with Roman aid in 37 <span>BC<\/span>, began to dismantle it about 21 <span>BC<\/span> in preparation for the construction of his own grand temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HerodsTemple\">Herod’s Temple<\/p>\n<p>Apart from over 100 references in the NT, our main sources of information about Herod’s temple come from the Jewish historian Josephus and from the Middoth (a section of the Jewish rabbinic writings). There are considerable differences in detail between the two, which rules out any dogmatic interpretation in attempted reconstructions. Since Josephus was contemporary with the temple (he was born about <span>AD<\/span> 37 and died early in the second century), he is probably more reliable than the Middoth, which, dating from about <span>AD<\/span> 150, appears to exaggerate occasionally. Archaeological research has been helpful in determining the positions of the outer walls and gates.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s motive in building his temple was political rather than religious. As an Idumean, he wished to placate his Jewish subjects by constructing a sanctuary as magnificent as Solomon’s. Possible fears that the site might be profaned, or that the existing temple might be demolished and never rebuilt, were allayed by the training of 1,000 priests as masons and the amassing of materials before the work commenced. Herod’s temple followed the tripartite plan of its predecessors, although its porch was much larger. It was built in the contemporary Greco-Roman architectural style and must therefore be regarded as distinct from Zerubbabel’s temple. Work began in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and while the main sanctuary was quickly erected (it was in full operation within ten years), the total project was not completed until <span>AD<\/span> 64, only six years before it was destroyed by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Herod first prepared the site by clearing and leveling an area approximately 500 yards (457.2 meters) from north to south and about 325 yards (297.2 meters) from east to west. This involved cutting away sections of rock in some areas and building up with rubble in others. Considerable sections of the enclosing wall, constructed on stone blocks averaging about 15 feet (4.6 meters) long by 4 feet (1.2 meters) high, still survive. Some of the stones in the corners of the south wall weigh up to 70 tons (63.5 metric tons).<\/p>\n<p>The sanctuary itself seems to have been based on the same dimensions as Solomon’s temple. It was divided into the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 60 feet high, and the Holy of Holies, which was 30 feet square. There was no furniture within the Holy of Holies, which was separated by a veil from the Holy Place. The Holy Place contained the seven-branch lampstand, the table for the bread of the Presence, and the incense altar. The main divergence from Solomon’s temple was the imposing porch, 150 feet (45.7 meters) in width and height. Outside was a doorway approximately 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide by 40 feet (12.2 meters) high, with an inner doorway about half that size leading into the sanctuary. By allowing empty rooms over the Holy of Holies and the Holy Place, there was a uniform roof height of 150 feet (45.7 meters). Golden spikes on the roof discouraged birds from alighting and defiling the structure. Like its predecessors, the temple was oriented toward the east and was surrounded on the other sides by three stories of rooms rising to a height of 60 feet (18.3 meters). The stone used was the local white stone, cut in huge blocks and highly polished.<\/p>\n<p>Access to the porch was by a flight of 12 steps from the Court of the Priests. Centrally placed before the porch and 33 feet (10.1 meters) away was the altar of sacrifice. Made of unhewn stone, it was a multilevel construction 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and about 48 feet (14.6 meters) square at its base. Male Israelites were allowed into this area once a year, during the Feast of the Tabernacles, to walk around the altar of sacrifice. Otherwise, they were restricted to the Court of Israel. To the east of the Court of Israel, and separated from it by a flight of 15 steps and by the ornate Great Gate, made of Corinthian bronze, was the Court of the Women. Here the offertory chests for temple expenses were located (Mk 12:41-44). The next court was the large, lower, outer Court of the Gentiles, which surrounded the inner courts and was separated from them by a balustrade and a series of warning notices. Two of these have been excavated, written in Latin and Greek and forbidding trespass by Gentiles into the inner areas, on pain of death. This outer court was widely used. Immediately inside its walls was a portico, supported by four rows of columns almost 40 feet (12.2 meters) high on the south side (the Royal Porch), and two rows on the other sides, the eastern portico known as “Solomon’s Porch” or “Solomon’s Colonnade.” Here is the area where the stalls of the money changers and merchants were set up, where the Sanhedrin met, and where Christ and the scribes taught and debated (Mk 11:27; Lk 2:46; 19:47; Jn 10:23). Here, too, the infant church met before it was rejected by a hostile Judaism (Acts 3:11; 5:12). Just to the northwest of the temple enclosure was the Fortress of Antonia, where the Roman governor resided while in Jerusalem, and where a Roman garrison was on hand to deal with disturbances (Acts 21:31-40). Overlooking the temple area, it was separated from it by a wide moat. The high priest’s vestments were stored in the fortress as a symbol of Roman authority. Access to the Court of the Gentiles was by four gates in the west wall; two in the south wall, where the ground fell away steeply into the valley, a site often identified as the pinnacle of the temple (Mt 4:5; Lk 4:9); and one gate in each of the east and north walls.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceoftheTempleintheOldTestament\">Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The temple in Jerusalem functioned as the focal point of the tribal confederation. In spite of the attempt of Jeroboam I, the first king of the northern kingdom, to divert attention from Jerusalem by establishing shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:26-30), Jerusalem never lost its preeminence. Naturally, both Hezekiah and Josiah sought to extend their reformation into the area of the northern tribes (2 Chr 30:1-12; 34:6-7), and Jerusalem was a pilgrimage center for those areas even after its destruction (Jer 41:5). The prophets foretold its destiny as the focal point of universal worship (Is 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>The temple was God’s dwelling place among his people. God’s presence, symbolized in the shekinah glory and the pillar of cloud, was associated with the tent of meeting (Ex 33:9-11), with the tabernacle (40:34-38), and finally with the temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The paradox is that while God is completely unrestricted, the temple was considered a place for God to live forever (vv 13, 27). God had chosen Zion, as he had chosen David (Pss 68:15-18; 76:2; 78:67-72), so the temple was regarded as God’s house (27:4; 42:4; 84:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Temple<\/h5>\n<p>Ezekiel’s detailed description of the ideal temple (Ez 40–48) was not used as the blueprint for Zerubbabel’s temple. In fact, since Ezekiel must have been familiar with Solomon’s temple before his deportation in 597 <span>BC<\/span>, his description is of greater help in determining uncertain details of the first temple. Ezekiel’s concern was to show the nature of pure worship, safeguarded from all contamination. This worship would allow the glory of God, which had departed from corrupted Solomon’s temple (9:3; 10:4, 18-19: 11:22-23), to return so that Jerusalem could again be named “the Lord is there” (43:1-5; 48:35). This thought, linked with Ezekiel’s vital concept of God’s Spirit indwelling his faithful worshipers (36:24-28), anticipated the NT teaching of the believers becoming God’s temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceoftheTempleintheNewTestament\">Significance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>Christ and the Temple<\/h5>\n<p>Christ showed considerable respect for the temple. When he was 12 years old, he entered into the rabbinic discussions in its porticoes and described it as his Father’s house (Lk 2:41-50). To him “the house of God” was indwelt by God (Mt 12:4; 23:21). Although he twice cleansed it in righteous anger (Mt 21:12-13; Jn 2:13-16), he wept over the impending destruction of the city and temple (Lk 19:41-44). He often taught there, but he was “greater than the temple” (Mt 12:6). When his presentation to Jerusalem as the predicted Messiah was rejected, in spite of attendant miracles, he foretold its inevitable destruction (Mt 21:9-15; 24:1-2). For a brief period after Pentecost, the early church used the temple as its meeting place, until mounting opposition drove believers from Jerusalem (Acts 5:12, 21, 42; 8:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Church as the Temple<\/h5>\n<p>The NT writers used two different Greek words to describe the temple: <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">naos<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieron<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Naos<\/span> refers to the actual sanctuary of the temple, the place of God’s dwelling. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Hieron<\/span> refers to the temple precincts as well as to the sanctuary. Generally speaking, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">naos<\/span> was used to designate the inner section of the temple known as the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, whereas <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieron<\/span> included the outer court and the temple proper.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s epistles the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">naos<\/span> appears six times (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 2 Thes 2:4) and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieron<\/span> once (1 Cor 9:13). In these verses Paul maintains the distinction of definition noted above. When speaking of the actual physical temple, he used the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieron<\/span> to indicate the place where the priests offered up animal sacrifices on the altar (1 Cor 9:13), which was situated in the outer court (see Ex 27–29, 40). And when Paul referred to the abominable act of the lawless one in usurping God’s place in the temple, he used the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">naos<\/span>—the word that designates the place of deity’s presence (2 Thes 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>In all the other Pauline passages, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">naos<\/span> is used metaphorically—to depict a human habitation for the divine Spirit. In one instance the sanctuary image is used to describe the individual believer’s body (1 Cor 6:19); in every other instance the sanctuary depicts Christ’s body, the church (1 Cor 3:16-17; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21). Mistakenly, many readers think 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 speaks of the individual, but according to the Greek text, it is unquestionably clear that Paul was speaking about the collective church (specifically, the church in Corinth).<\/p>\n<p>When Paul told the church in Corinth that it was God’s sanctuary, they would have understood the image from their knowledge of pagan temples. But Paul probably had in mind the one temple in Jerusalem. The Gentiles had many gods with many temples in one city; the Jews had one God with only one temple in all of Israel. This helped to preserve unity among the Israelites. The Corinthians needed spiritual unity; they were fragmented due to their individual preferences (see 1 Cor 1:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians, Paul’s masterpiece on the church, he speaks of the local churches as living, organic entities that are all (compositely speaking) growing into a holy sanctuary in the Lord (Eph 2:21). Paul pictured each local church as providing God with a spiritual habitation in that locality (v 22) and as growing together with all the other churches into one holy, universal sanctuary for the Lord’s indwelling.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temple in John’s Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>In John’s revelation there is no material temple, even though he continues to use the imagery of Jerusalem and Mt Zion (Rv 3:12; 14:1; 21:2, 10, 22). Three interrelated ideas dominate. First is the concept of the church made up of martyrs, whose faithful members are God’s temple (3:12; 14:1). This temple grows gradually as the number of martyrs increases (6:11). Another aspect is the temple as the place of judgment (11:19; 14:15; 15:5–16:1). Finally, any temple in the new age is unnecessary, “for its temple is the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” (21:22). The ultimate state will be God’s dwelling with his people—the eternal, spritual temple.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Altar; Ark of the Covenant; Bread of the Presence; David; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; First Jewish Revolt; Judaism; Mercy Seat; Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Sanctuary; Singers in the Temple; Solomon (Person).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TEMPLE<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Solomon’s Temple<\/p>\n<p>• Zerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n<p>• Herod’s Temple<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>David’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptable to both. Jerusalem was then established as the national religious center by the return of the ark, which had been largely neglected since its capture by the Philistines (2 Sm 6:1-17). Henceforth, God’s choices of both David and Jerusalem (“Mount Zion”) were indissolubly linked (Ps 78:67-72).<\/p>\n<p>David’s great impulse was to build an adequate dwelling place for Israel’s God. The idea was initially approved by Nathan the prophet (2 Sm 7:1-3), but God revealed otherwise to him, and he conveyed the divine purpose to David (vv 4-17). In a significant wordplay, David was informed that, while he was not to build a house (temple) for God, God would build a house (dynasty) for him. David was not the one to build a temple because of the numerous wars during his reign; the temple would instead be built by his son (1 Kgs 5:3; 1 Chr 22:7-8; 28:3). Nevertheless, David enthusiastically amassed most of the necessary finances and materials and drew up the blueprints for the temple (1 Chr 22:3-5, 14; 28:2, 11-19). He also purchased the temple site (21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SolomonsTemple\">Solomon’s Temple<\/p>\n\n<h5>Date<\/h5>\n<p>Construction commenced in Solomon’s fourth year, about 966 <span>BC<\/span>, and took seven years to complete (1 Kgs 6:1, 38). Everything necessary for the temple, including the workers, had been prepared by David (1 Chr 28:21). The temple evidently had first priority among Solomon’s building schemes, as he built his own palace later (1 Kgs 7:1).<\/p>\n<h5>Superintendents and Workforce<\/h5>\n<p>The principal architect for the bronze furnishings was Huram (Hebrew “Hiram”), whose father was a metal craftsman from Tyre and whose mother was an Israelite (1 Kgs 7:13-14). Cedar for the temple came from Lebanon and was felled and transported by the skilled woodsmen of another Hiram—the king of Tyre, Solomon’s ally (5:5-9). Thirty thousand Israelites, divided into three groups, were drafted to assist at Lebanon. Each group was on duty for one month in three. For the stonework, Solomon conscripted 153,600 foreigners resident in Israel to provide a self-contained group of carriers, stone cutters, and supervisors (vv 15-17; 2 Chr 2:17-18). Possibly the “men of Gebal,” with their specialized skills, formed yet another group (1 Kgs 5:18). Building the temple was obviously a national project of immense size and effort. In order to preserve the sanctity of the site and to eliminate noise, the masonry and carpentry were not done at the temple site (6:7).<\/p>\n<h5>Description<\/h5>\n<p>The details given in the Bible are sufficiently clear for us to make a reasonably accurate description of the temple. The accounts in Kings and Chronicles are supplemented by Ezekiel’s depiction of the temple (see below), which was broadly based on his knowledge of the Jerusalem temple (Ez 40–48).<\/p>\n<p>The side rooms probably rested on a foundation or platform that was separate from the temple itself (1 Kgs 6:5, 10; cf. Ez 41:8-9) and were arranged in three stories, each seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high, extending around the whole building except for the porch side. Each successive story was one and a half feet (.5 meter) wider than the one below, these dimensions coinciding with the thickness of the side wall of the Holy Place. The ground floor rooms were seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) wide; the first story was nine feet (2.7 meters), and the second was ten and a half feet (3.2 meters). Access to the upper stories was possibly by winding staircases (1 Kgs 6:8). There is some uncertainty concerning the location of the entrances; there may have been one on either side, but only one is mentioned (v 8). As in Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 40:17, 28), there were two adjacent courts, an inner and an outer (1 Kgs 6:36; 7:12), but no dimensions are given for these. The inner court, or “court of the priests,” being next to the temple itself, was also called “the upper court” (2 Chr 4:9; Jer 36:10). The wall of the inner court was made of three layers of hewn stone held together by a layer of cedar beams (1 Kgs 6:36), and the doors of both courts were sheathed in bronze (2 Chr 4:9). The palace buildings were within the outer court area, probably with a private passageway between the palace and the temple that was later closed during the reign of Ahaz (2 Chr 4:9, 12; 2 Kgs 16:18).<\/p>\n<p>The temple itself was 90 feet (27.4 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 45 feet (13.7 meters) high (1 Kgs 6:2), with a porch or vestibule 15 feet (4.6 meters) deep stretching across the width. Probably the vestibule was on the east end of the temple, thus corresponding with the orientation of Ezekiel’s temple (Ez 43:1; 44:1). The larger part of the main sanctuary, next to the porch, formed the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long (1 Kgs 6:17). Beyond this was the innermost sanctuary, the Holy of Holies (or the “Most Holy Place“), which was a perfect cube of 30 feet (9.1 meters). All the interior walls were paneled with cedar decorated with flower patterns, cherubim, and palm trees, so that no masonry was visible. The walls of both inner and outer sanctuaries were “overlaid” (v 22) with pure gold. Actually the gold decoration may have been inlaid, on the basis that a solid sheath of gold would spoil the natural beauty of the wood carving. The floor was made of cypress planks (v 15). Narrow windows set high in the walls above the level of the three-storied outer chambers provided light in the Holy Place (v 4). The ceiling was paneled with beams and planks of cedar. No detail is given about the exterior roofing, but probably the contemporary technique was employed, using a wooden, latticelike framework into which a waterproof, limestone plaster was packed and rolled.<\/p>\n<p>The outer porch was apparently an open space, since no doors are mentioned. Access into the Holy Place was by double doors, both hinged to fold back on themselves, made of cypress and decorated in exactly the same way as the interior walls (vv 34-35). The doorposts were made of olive wood. Within the Holy Place was the altar of incense made of cedar overlaid with gold; it was placed centrally before the Holy of Holies. Also in the Holy Place were a table for the bread of the Presence of God, ten lampstands arranged in two groups of five on either side, and various utensils required for maintaining the priestly duties (1 Kgs 7:48-50). All these were made or overlaid with gold. The ten tables, arranged five on each side, were presumably for the utensils and accessories (2 Chr 4:8).<\/p>\n<p>Between the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies was a double door made of olive wood, carved with cherubim, palm trees, and flower patterns and overlaid with gold. Inside these doors, veiling still further the Holy of Holies, was a blue, purple, and crimson curtain, made of the finest fabrics and ornamented with cherubim (2 Chr 3:14).<\/p>\n<p>In the Holy of Holies were two cherubim, each 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and made of olive wood covered with gold (1 Kgs 6:23-28). Each wing measured seven and a half feet (2.3 meters). A wing of each touched the side walls; the other wings met at the center of the room. The divine throne had been considerably less impressive in the tabernacle, where a wing of each cherubim fused into the mercy seat above the ark (Ex 25:17-22). In Solomon’s temple, the ark of the covenant was placed below the forward-facing cherubim, the symbolic protectors. The ark, the only major item surviving from the Mosaic tabernacle, still contained the tablets of the law, but the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod were missing (1 Kgs 8:9).<\/p>\n<p>Immediately outside the temple and on either side of the vestibule were two hollow bronze pillars (1 Kgs 7:15-20; 2 Chr 3:15-17). According to the book of Kings, these pillars were 27 feet (8.2 meters) high, with a circumference of 18 feet (5.5 meters). The metal itself was about four inches (10.2 centimeters) thick. The pillars were surmounted by bronze, lily-shaped capitals seven and a half feet (2.3 meters) high and six feet (1.8 meters) wide, intricately adorned with a chain latticework that supported two rows of pomegranates. The total weight must have been enormous, and their size is attested to by Jeremiah, who notes that the Babylonians had to break them in pieces before transporting them to Babylon (Jer 52:17, 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The bronze altar of sacrifice in front of the vestibule is not listed in the specifications of 1 Kings 7. However, it is mentioned in the temple dedication and subsequently (1 Kgs 8:22, 54, 64; 9:25) and clearly stood in the inner court. Its dimensions were 30 feet (9.1 meters) square and 15 feet (4.6 meters) high (2 Chr 4:1). In view of its weight, it was probably cast in sections at Solomon’s foundry in the Jordan Rift valley (vv 17-18) and then transported to the temple site for assembly.<\/p>\n<p>Probably the most striking article in the inner court was the “molten (bronze) sea,” a huge, round tank made of bronze 3 inches (8 centimeters) thick, 7½ feet (2.3 meters) high, and 15 feet (4.6 meters) in diameter (1 Kgs 7:23-26). Its rim flared out like a lily (2 Chr 4:2-5). The tank was supported on 12 bronze oxen, four on each side, and had two rows of decoration, possibly gourds or pomegranates, under the brim. Its capacity was between 10,000 and 12,000 gallons (37,850–45,420 liters). The bronze sea was used for priestly ablutions (v 6). Presumably this involved a platform of sorts, for the brim of this vast basin would have been about 15 feet (4.6 meters) above ground level.<\/p>\n<p>Hiram also constructed ten large lavers, mounted on moveable stands and placed in two groups of five, on the north and south sides of the inner court (1 Kgs 7:27-39). Basically the stands were bronze boxes, six feet (1.8 meters) square and four and a half feet (1.4 meters) high with a nine-inch (22.9-centimeter) rim around the top edge. Each corner was attached to braced posts to which the axles were fixed. The four-spoked wheels were 27 inches (68.6 centimeters) high. Into each stand there fitted a laver containing approximately 220 gallons (832.7 liters) of water, used for washing sacrificial animals (2 Chr 4:6). Probably each was adjacent to one of the ten tables that would be used to flay and otherwise prepare the sacrifices (v 8). Supplementary items, such as pots, shovels, and basins, all made of bronze, were also manufactured (1 Kgs 7:40, 45).<\/p>\n<h5>The Dedication<\/h5>\n<p>Eleven months elapsed between the completion of the temple and its dedication (1 Kgs 6:38; 8:2), during which time the major items of furniture were set in place. The dedication itself took place in the seventh month, presumably in connection with the Feast of Tabernacles and the Day of Atonement (Lv 23:23-36). The ark of the covenant was brought into its final resting place (1 Kgs 8:3-4), but the inner court proved inadequate for the vast numbers of beasts sacrificed (1 Kgs 8:62-64; 2 Chr 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>The temple employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense had been spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Yet Solomon readily confessed its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27). His prayer also underlined Israel’s propensity to forsake the Lord, contrasting the nation with God, who, though a just judge, was also merciful and faithful. The climax of the proceedings came when fire from heaven consumed the sacrifices and the shekinah glory filled the temple (2 Chr 7:1-3).<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\n<p>Like most ancient shrines, the temple became a treasury for national wealth and as such was often the target for attack. Shishak of Egypt plundered it within five years of Solomon’s death (1 Kgs 14:25-38). Shortly afterward, King Asa (910–869 <span>BC<\/span>) depleted its gold and silver treasures to buy Syrian help against his oppressor, Baasha (908–886 <span>BC<\/span>), king of Israel (15:16-19). Joash, the king of Judah (835–796 <span>BC<\/span>) who was concealed in the temple from the vicious Athaliah during his youth (2 Kgs 11), made provision for its repair after protesting the priests’ embezzlement of gifts (12:4-16). But after the death of Jehoiada, the high priest, Joash himself was adversely influenced by his nobles (2 Chr 24:15-19). As punishment for his apostasy, the Lord allowed the Syrians to attack, and Joash used the temple treasures to buy them off (2 Kgs 12:17-18). Hardly had provision for replacements been made, when Jehoash of Israel (798–782 <span>BC<\/span>), having shattered the arrogant pride of Amaziah of Judah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>), again stripped the temple (14:8-14). Later, King Ahaz (735-715 <span>BC<\/span>) used the remaining resources of the temple to enlist support from the Assyrians (16:7-9), though he eventually became completely subservient to them.<\/p>\n<p> Then Hezekiah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>), one of the great reforming kings, thoroughly renovated the temple and restored worship after it had fallen into disuse during theclosing years of Ahaz (2 Chr 29:1-19; 31:9-21). Manasseh (696–642 <span>BC<\/span>), however, completely reversed his father’s policy, bringing the practices of Canaanite and Mesopotamian worship into the temple (2 Kgs 21:3-7). His conversion experience, which probably occurred late in his reign and resulted in certain reform measures in the temple (2 Chr 33:12-19), was not far-reaching enough to escape the final judgment that his reign was the dark spot of Judah’s history (2 Kgs 21:10-16).<\/p>\n<p>Manasseh’s grandson Josiah (640–609 <span>BC<\/span>), was the second great reforming king. He organized the repair of the temple in 622 <span>BC<\/span>, during which the lost Book of the Law (almost certainly the book of Deuteronomy) was discovered (2 Kgs 22:3-13). As a result, Josiah’s reformation gained a new dimension and sense of urgency (22:14–23:3). The reformation included a thorough purge of all idolatrous elements from the temple (23:4-12) and the restoration of the traditional festivals. Sadly, however, Josiah’s reformation died with him, and Judah’s downward slide continued under the apostate Jehoiakim (609–598 <span>BC<\/span>). It was probably during this time that Jeremiah preached his famous temple sermon foretelling its destruction (Jer 7:1–8:3; 26:1-19), which alienated him from the religious leaders. In Nebuchadnezzar’s reprisal raid following Jehoiakim’s rebellion in 601 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Kgs 24:1-4), Jerusalem was captured (596 <span>BC<\/span>) and many of the temple treasures were transported to Babylon (2 Chr 36:7). The temple itself appears to have escaped damage, but when Judah again rebelled under Zedekiah (597–586 <span>BC<\/span>), the temple was demolished (2 Kgs 25:8-10). The remaining temple treasures were taken away.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ZerubbabelsTemple\">Zerubbabel’s Temple<\/p>\n<h5>Construction<\/h5>\n<p>Although the temple was devastated, the site still remained as a place of pilgrimage during the exile (Jer 41:4-5). In 538 <span>BC<\/span> the Persian king, Cyrus, in pursuance of a liberal policy diametrically opposed to that of the earlier empires, permitted the Jews to return from exile. And he authorized the rebuilding of the temple, financing it from the Persian treasury.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Ezra, the decree of authorization has been preserved in two forms: the general proclamation (Ezr 1:2-4) and a more prosaic memorandum in the national archives indicating the main temple specifications and the amount of promised Persian help (6:1-5). Probably only a minority of the Jews opted to leave the relative comforts of Mesopotamia for the dangers of a long journey to their desolated homeland. According to the book of Ezra, 42,360 dedicated individuals and their servants (2:64-65) responded under the leadership of Sheshbazzar (1:8-11; 5:14-16) and Zerubbabel (2:2; 3:2, 8; 4:2). With great enthusiasm, the altar was rebuilt on the temple site and the traditional pattern of worship reestablished (3:1-6). Utilizing the grant from Persia as well as their own freewill gifts (2:68-69; 3:7), the Jews began to plan the second temple and lay its foundations (3:7-13). The initial impetus quickly died as a result of local opposition (4:1-4, 24), selfish preoccupation, and crop failures (Hg 1:2-11). In 520 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), inspired by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the Jews under Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest commenced rebuilding. Work continued in spite of official suspicion, if not direct opposition, and the temple was completed and dedicated in 515 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1–6:22).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of the physical features of Zerubbabel’s temple. The inference that it was vastly inferior to Solomon’s temple (Hg 2:3) probably relates to an early stage in the building operation. In fact, the second temple stood for over 500 years. The dimensions noted in Ezra 6:3 are incomplete; the new temple was no doubt about the same size as its predecessor and was probably built on the same foundation. The construction technique appears to have followed the method of the original, with layers of timber providing a framework for sections of masonry (v 4). Clearly, there was auxiliary accommodation, probably like the side rooms of Solomon’s temple (Ezr 8:29; Neh 12:44; 13:4-5). If Persian aid was forthcoming as promised (Ezr 6:8-12), the second temple was a more splendid, substantial structure than is generally supposed.<\/p>\n<h5>Later History<\/h5>\n<p>Several references in the Apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, rabbinic writings, and the historian Josephus help to illumine the history of the temple and give more detail on its structure and furnishings. Josephus, quoting from Hecateus of Abdera (fourth century <span>BC<\/span>), states that the temple was a large building in an enclosure about 500 feet by 150 feet (152.4 meters by 45.7 meters), surrounded by a stone wall, with an altar of unhewn stones the same size as Solomon’s bronze altar (cf. 2 Chr 4:1). Within the sanctuary was a golden altar of incense and a lampstand, the flame of which burned continually. Josephus also notes that Antiochus III (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>) financially supported the temple when the Seleucids displaced the Ptolemies as masters of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Ben Sirach, early in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, commended Simon, the son of Onias the high priest, for his work in fortifying and repairing the temple area. First Maccabees provides valuable evidence of the fate of the temple during the oppression under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 <span>BC<\/span>). The books of the Maccabees recount the defilement of the altar of burnt offering (1 Macc 1:54) and the plundering of the golden lampstand, altar of incense, table of offering, veil, and other treasures (2 Macc 5:15-16; 6:2-4). When the temple was recaptured and restored, the victorious Maccabees replaced the items taken by the Seleucids, except for the altar of sacrifice, which was considered so polluted that it was dismantled and replaced by a new one constructed of unhewn stone (1 Macc 4:36-61; 2 Macc 10:1-9). Clearly the temple area was used as a fortress, both in opposition to the Seleucid garrison that was maintained in Jerusalem in the Maccabean period and in the conflicts of the later Hasmonean period. When Pompey captured Jerusalem about 63 <span>BC<\/span>, he entered the temple to assert his authority but took no plunder, thus showing respect for it.<\/p>\n<p>The history of Zerubbabel’s temple closed when Herod, having carefully preserved it from any major damage when he gained control of Jerusalem with Roman aid in 37 <span>BC<\/span>, began to dismantle it about 21 <span>BC<\/span> in preparation for the construction of his own grand temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HerodsTemple\">Herod’s Temple<\/p>\n<p>Apart from over 100 references in the NT, our main sources of information about Herod’s temple come from the Jewish historian Josephus and from the Middoth (a section of the Jewish rabbinic writings). There are considerable differences in detail between the two, which rules out any dogmatic interpretation in attempted reconstructions. Since Josephus was contemporary with the temple (he was born about <span>AD<\/span> 37 and died early in the second century), he is probably more reliable than the Middoth, which, dating from about <span>AD<\/span> 150, appears to exaggerate occasionally. Archaeological research has been helpful in determining the positions of the outer walls and gates.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s motive in building his temple was political rather than religious. As an Idumean, he wished to placate his Jewish subjects by constructing a sanctuary as magnificent as Solomon’s. Possible fears that the site might be profaned, or that the existing temple might be demolished and never rebuilt, were allayed by the training of 1,000 priests as masons and the amassing of materials before the work commenced. Herod’s temple followed the tripartite plan of its predecessors, although its porch was much larger. It was built in the contemporary Greco-Roman architectural style and must therefore be regarded as distinct from Zerubbabel’s temple. Work began in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and while the main sanctuary was quickly erected (it was in full operation within ten years), the total project was not completed until <span>AD<\/span> 64, only six years before it was destroyed by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Herod first prepared the site by clearing and leveling an area approximately 500 yards (457.2 meters) from north to south and about 325 yards (297.2 meters) from east to west. This involved cutting away sections of rock in some areas and building up with rubble in others. Considerable sections of the enclosing wall, constructed on stone blocks averaging about 15 feet (4.6 meters) long by 4 feet (1.2 meters) high, still survive. Some of the stones in the corners of the south wall weigh up to 70 tons (63.5 metric tons).<\/p>\n<p>The sanctuary itself seems to have been based on the same dimensions as Solomon’s temple. It was divided into the Holy Place, which was 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide, and 60 feet high, and the Holy of Holies, which was 30 feet square. There was no furniture within the Holy of Holies, which was separated by a veil from the Holy Place. The Holy Place contained the seven-branch lampstand, the table for the bread of the Presence, and the incense altar. The main divergence from Solomon’s temple was the imposing porch, 150 feet (45.7 meters) in width and height. Outside was a doorway approximately 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide by 40 feet (12.2 meters) high, with an inner doorway about half that size leading into the sanctuary. By allowing empty rooms over the Holy of Holies and the Holy Place, there was a uniform roof height of 150 feet (45.7 meters). Golden spikes on the roof discouraged birds from alighting and defiling the structure. Like its predecessors, the temple was oriented toward the east and was surrounded on the other sides by three stories of rooms rising to a height of 60 feet (18.3 meters). The stone used was the local white stone, cut in huge blocks and highly polished.<\/p>\n<p>Access to the porch was by a flight of 12 steps from the Court of the Priests. Centrally placed before the porch and 33 feet (10.1 meters) away was the altar of sacrifice. Made of unhewn stone, it was a multilevel construction 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and about 48 feet (14.6 meters) square at its base. Male Israelites were allowed into this area once a year, during the Feast of the Tabernacles, to walk around the altar of sacrifice. Otherwise, they were restricted to the Court of Israel. To the east of the Court of Israel, and separated from it by a flight of 15 steps and by the ornate Great Gate, made of Corinthian bronze, was the Court of the Women. Here the offertory chests for temple expenses were located (Mk 12:41-44). The next court was the large, lower, outer Court of the Gentiles, which surrounded the inner courts and was separated from them by a balustrade and a series of warning notices. Two of these have been excavated, written in Latin and Greek and forbidding trespass by Gentiles into the inner areas, on pain of death. This outer court was widely used. Immediately inside its walls was a portico, supported by four rows of columns almost 40 feet (12.2 meters) high on the south side (the Royal Porch), and two rows on the other sides, the eastern portico known as “Solomon’s Porch” or “Solomon’s Colonnade.” Here is the area where the stalls of the money changers and merchants were set up, where the Sanhedrin met, and where Christ and the scribes taught and debated (Mk 11:27; Lk 2:46; 19:47; Jn 10:23). Here, too, the infant church met before it was rejected by a hostile Judaism (Acts 3:11; 5:12). Just to the northwest of the temple enclosure was the Fortress of Antonia, where the Roman governor resided while in Jerusalem, and where a Roman garrison was on hand to deal with disturbances (Acts 21:31-40). Overlooking the temple area, it was separated from it by a wide moat. The high priest’s vestments were stored in the fortress as a symbol of Roman authority. Access to the Court of the Gentiles was by four gates in the west wall; two in the south wall, where the ground fell away steeply into the valley, a site often identified as the pinnacle of the temple (Mt 4:5; Lk 4:9); and one gate in each of the east and north walls.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceoftheTempleintheOldTestament\">Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The temple in Jerusalem functioned as the focal point of the tribal confederation. In spite of the attempt of Jeroboam I, the first king of the northern kingdom, to divert attention from Jerusalem by establishing shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:26-30), Jerusalem never lost its preeminence. Naturally, both Hezekiah and Josiah sought to extend their reformation into the area of the northern tribes (2 Chr 30:1-12; 34:6-7), and Jerusalem was a pilgrimage center for those areas even after its destruction (Jer 41:5). The prophets foretold its destiny as the focal point of universal worship (Is 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>The temple was God’s dwelling place among his people. God’s presence, symbolized in the shekinah glory and the pillar of cloud, was associated with the tent of meeting (Ex 33:9-11), with the tabernacle (40:34-38), and finally with the temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The paradox is that while God is completely unrestricted, the temple was considered a place for God to live forever (vv 13, 27). God had chosen Zion, as he had chosen David (Pss 68:15-18; 76:2; 78:67-72), so the temple was regarded as God’s house (27:4; 42:4; 84:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Temple<\/h5>\n<p>Ezekiel’s detailed description of the ideal temple (Ez 40–48) was not used as the blueprint for Zerubbabel’s temple. In fact, since Ezekiel must have been familiar with Solomon’s temple before his deportation in 597 <span>BC<\/span>, his description is of greater help in determining uncertain details of the first temple. Ezekiel’s concern was to show the nature of pure worship, safeguarded from all contamination. This worship would allow the glory of God, which had departed from corrupted Solomon’s temple (9:3; 10:4, 18-19: 11:22-23), to return so that Jerusalem could again be named “the Lord is there” (43:1-5; 48:35). This thought, linked with Ezekiel’s vital concept of God’s Spirit indwelling his faithful worshipers (36:24-28), anticipated the NT teaching of the believers becoming God’s temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceoftheTempleintheNewTestament\">Significance of the Temple in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>Christ and the Temple<\/h5>\n<p>Christ showed considerable respect for the temple. When he was 12 years old, he entered into the rabbinic discussions in its porticoes and described it as his Father’s house (Lk 2:41-50). To him “the house of God” was indwelt by God (Mt 12:4; 23:21). Although he twice cleansed it in righteous anger (Mt 21:12-13; Jn 2:13-16), he wept over the impending destruction of the city and temple (Lk 19:41-44). He often taught there, but he was “greater than the temple” (Mt 12:6). When his presentation to Jerusalem as the predicted Messiah was rejected, in spite of attendant miracles, he foretold its inevitable destruction (Mt 21:9-15; 24:1-2). For a brief period after Pentecost, the early church used the temple as its meeting place, until mounting opposition drove believers from Jerusalem (Acts 5:12, 21, 42; 8:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Church as the Temple<\/h5>\n<p>The NT writers used two different Greek words to describe the temple: <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">naos<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieron<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Naos<\/span> refers to the actual sanctuary of the temple, the place of God’s dwelling. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Hieron<\/span> refers to the temple precincts as well as to the sanctuary. Generally speaking, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">naos<\/span> was used to designate the inner section of the temple known as the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, whereas <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieron<\/span> included the outer court and the temple proper.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s epistles the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">naos<\/span> appears six times (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 2 Thes 2:4) and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieron<\/span> once (1 Cor 9:13). In these verses Paul maintains the distinction of definition noted above. When speaking of the actual physical temple, he used the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieron<\/span> to indicate the place where the priests offered up animal sacrifices on the altar (1 Cor 9:13), which was situated in the outer court (see Ex 27–29, 40). And when Paul referred to the abominable act of the lawless one in usurping God’s place in the temple, he used the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">naos<\/span>—the word that designates the place of deity’s presence (2 Thes 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>In all the other Pauline passages, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">naos<\/span> is used metaphorically—to depict a human habitation for the divine Spirit. In one instance the sanctuary image is used to describe the individual believer’s body (1 Cor 6:19); in every other instance the sanctuary depicts Christ’s body, the church (1 Cor 3:16-17; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21). Mistakenly, many readers think 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 speaks of the individual, but according to the Greek text, it is unquestionably clear that Paul was speaking about the collective church (specifically, the church in Corinth).<\/p>\n<p>When Paul told the church in Corinth that it was God’s sanctuary, they would have understood the image from their knowledge of pagan temples. But Paul probably had in mind the one temple in Jerusalem. The Gentiles had many gods with many temples in one city; the Jews had one God with only one temple in all of Israel. This helped to preserve unity among the Israelites. The Corinthians needed spiritual unity; they were fragmented due to their individual preferences (see 1 Cor 1:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians, Paul’s masterpiece on the church, he speaks of the local churches as living, organic entities that are all (compositely speaking) growing into a holy sanctuary in the Lord (Eph 2:21). Paul pictured each local church as providing God with a spiritual habitation in that locality (v 22) and as growing together with all the other churches into one holy, universal sanctuary for the Lord’s indwelling.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temple in John’s Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>In John’s revelation there is no material temple, even though he continues to use the imagery of Jerusalem and Mt Zion (Rv 3:12; 14:1; 21:2, 10, 22). Three interrelated ideas dominate. First is the concept of the church made up of martyrs, whose faithful members are God’s temple (3:12; 14:1). This temple grows gradually as the number of martyrs increases (6:11). Another aspect is the temple as the place of judgment (11:19; 14:15; 15:5–16:1). Finally, any temple in the new age is unnecessary, “for its temple is the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” (21:22). The ultimate state will be God’s dwelling with his people—the eternal, spritual temple.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Altar; Ark of the Covenant; Bread of the Presence; David; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; First Jewish Revolt; Judaism; Mercy Seat; Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Sanctuary; Singers in the Temple; Solomon (Person).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TEMPLE Preview • Background • Solomon’s Temple • Zerubbabel’s Temple • Herod’s Temple • Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament • Significance of the Temple in the New Testament Background David’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptabl...","summary_en":"TEMPLE Preview • Background • Solomon’s Temple • Zerubbabel’s Temple • Herod’s Temple • Significance of the Temple in the Old Testament • Significance of the Temple in the New Testament Background David’s capture of Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:6-9) and his designation of it as the nation’s capital is one of the great masterstrokes of history. Occupied by the Jebusites, it was a pocket of neutral territory between the northern and southern sections of David’s united kingdom and was politically acceptabl...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37622,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Travel","title_en":"Travel","content_ro":"<h3>TRAVEL<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinOldTestamentTimes\">Travel in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Several accounts depict the people of Israel moving over restricted areas to graze their flocks. Joseph’s brothers took their flocks from the south of the land up to Shechem and then to Dothan (Gn 37:12-17), but this was a mere 60 miles (96.5 kilometers). David traveled around Palestine and even went to Moab (1 Sm 22:3). The Danites moved from their home southwest of Jerusalem to the north, just south of the Lebanon Mountains (Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<p>Examples of travel for pasturage, migration, and protection could be multiplied. Such travelers would normally walk, though the ass was used both for riding and as a pack animal. The ox was employed for transporting heavy loads and sometimes for people (Gn 46:5). Later the camel came into general use (1 Kgs 10:2; 2 Kgs 8:9). Little is known of resting places for travelers in OT times. There are only a few references to a “lodging place” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malon<\/span>) in OT narratives (Gn 42:27; 43:21; Ex 4:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinNewTestamentTimes\">Travel in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman world knew a great deal of travel: to fulfill religious obligations at festival time, for trade, for government administration, for military purposes. Not the least among first-century travelers were the early Christian missionaries.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Roman peace and authority and the construction of well-made stone roads made travel relatively safe and quick. The modes of travel improved over that known in OT times. Long distances were traveled within the Roman Empire over good roads and in comparative safety. There were some hazards, however, notably in sea travel, from wind, storms, and pirates (Acts 15:39; 18:18-22; Rom 15:24-25; 2 Cor 11:25-26). Paul’s sea journey to Rome, for example, was perilous (Acts 27:1–28:14).<\/p>\n<p>The NT mentions a number of journeys on foot. Mary journeyed from Galilee to Judea to visit Elizabeth (Lk 1:39-40, 56). The baby Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the census (2:1-7); Jesus was brought to Jerusalem to comply with the Jewish purification law (v 22). Thus three trips were made from Nazareth to Jerusalem, a distance of about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers), from the time of Jesus’ conception to Mary’s purification. The annual Passover visit was made by Joseph and Mary (vv 41-51). Other journeys are mentioned (Jn 2:13; 5:1; 7:1-10; 12:1). Jesus himself walked to Jericho from Galilee (Mk 1:1-11) and also to the region of Tyre and Sidon (7:24). He was in Samaria more than once (Lk 17:11; Jn 4:4). His last journey to Jerusalem was via Jericho and up through the hills to Jerusalem (Mk 10:1, 46; 11:1). His last journey after the resurrection was to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\n<p>Paul traveled by sea on each of his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-14; 15:41–18:22; 18:23–21:17), generally accompanied by friends. He also made many journeys on foot in Palestine, Asia Minor, and the Greek peninsula. But not all travel was on foot in NT times. The ass, used for carrying loads, often carried people. Jesus once rode from Bethphage to Jerusalem, a short but highly symbolic journey (Mt 21:2-7; Mk 11:1-11; Jn 12:12-15). When Joseph traveled with his pregnant wife, Mary, to Bethlehem for the census at the time of Jesus’ birth, Mary probably rode on an ass. The Ethiopian eunuch was riding in a chariot after worshiping at Jerusalem and was joined by Philip traveling on foot (Acts 8:26-38). Roman soldiers both marched and made wide use of horses. When Paul was brought to Caesarea from Jerusalem, mounts were prepared for him (23:23-24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandSeaLanes\">Roads and Sea Lanes<\/p>\n<p>The roads of biblical times figured prominently in the geography, topography, and history of Palestine—a land that served as a bridge between Egypt and centers of civilization and trade in the Middle East. Many of the roads were strategically important, both commercially and militarily. Some roads gained significance as pilgrim routes to facilitate travel to religious centers like Jerusalem. Roads in biblical times were of three main types: long-distance international roads, medium-distance intraregional roads, and a variety of roads inside each region or state.<\/p>\n<h5>Great International Roads<\/h5>\n<p>These linked the Mediterranean coast to the northern Tigris Valley and southern Mesopotamia. Some linked Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, while others led south to Egypt, either along the coast or east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and across the Sinai Peninsula. There were trade routes between Anatolia and Assyria early in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Apparently the military campaign referred to in Genesis 14 aimed to secure the great trade route, the King’s Highway, from northern Mesopotamia to Egypt. Military invaders and travelers from Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia would head across the hinterlands of Syria toward the coast before turning south into Palestine and Egypt. The advent of European powers, Greece and Rome, into the Middle East opened up another vast network of international roads for the peoples of the East. Until Roman times, these roads were not surfaced with stone but were cleared pathways. They were very rough, ungraded, and in wet weather, impassable in many places. But they were evidently well defined by “waymarks” and “guideposts” (Jer 31:21). With the coming of the Romans, important roads were built with deep foundations and with large blocks of flat stone at the surface. The remains of these roads are still seen in many places in the Middle East and in Europe. Distance markers or milestones were regularly placed along the roads.<\/p>\n<h5>International North-South Roads in Palestine<\/h5>\n<p>The roads that linked countries to the north with Egypt passed through Palestine, a natural land bridge. There were three major roads. The coastal road began in Damascus and passed via Hazor across the plain of Esdraelon, through the Megiddo Pass, down the coast past Gaza and into Egypt. This was probably “the way of the sea” (Is 9:1). The Sinai road led from Egypt into the southern Negev and then to Kadesh-barnea, Beersheba, Hebron, Jerusalem, Shechem, Acco, Tyre, and Sidon. The Red Sea road entered the Palestine area from the Gulf of Aqaba, where the ancient port of Elath and Solomon’s port of Ezion-geber stood (Nm 33:35; 2 Chr 8:17). From there it led through the mountainous areas of Transjordan, crossing the deep wadis and then north through the Hauran region to Damascus. This was the road taken by caravans from southern Arabia to Damascus, the ancient King’s Highway (Nm 20:17; 21:22).<\/p>\n<p>There were other north-south roads of lesser importance. One coastal road led from Joppa via Caesarea and Dor to Acco, where it linked with the Sinai road. Evidently it was not very significant until Roman times, when the port of Caesarea was built. The marshes in the plain of Sharon posed many problems. The plain of Esdraelon was also marshy and interrupted the roads north in bad seasons. A raised road across the swampy sections was eventually constructed. Another road led north from Hazor, branching off the main trunk road to Damascus. The Jordan Valley road skirted the southwestern part of Galilee and led down the Jordan Valley to Jericho.<\/p>\n<h5>East-West Roads<\/h5>\n<p>Several important roads ran east-west, intersecting the larger roads leading north. One such road led from Gaza to Beersheba and then down the Arabah, with an offshoot to Petra. Another led from Ashkelon, via Gath, to Hebron and on to En-gedi on the Dead Sea. Another road led from Joppa east up the valley of Aijalon (Jos 10:6-14) to Bethel and on to Jericho. One well-used road led from Joppa to Shechem, across the Jordan at Adam (3:16) and into Gilead in Transjordan. Other roads led from Acco eastward to Galilee and also up the coast to Tyre and Sidon. There were, indeed, numerous east-west roads that provided contact between various parts of Palestine. In Roman times, when the speedy movement of armies was essential, some of the old roads were greatly improved and new ones built.<\/p>\n<h5>Sea Lanes<\/h5>\n<p>The people of Israel, unlike the Phoenicians, seldom used the sea lanes. When Solomon planned to send ships down the Red Sea to Ophir (1 Kgs 9:26-28), he used Phoenician seamen. Jehoshaphat planned a similar expedition, but his ships were wrecked (22:48-49). Coastal traffic in OT times was in the hands of Philistines and Phoenicians. There were several ports along the Mediterranean Sea coast, such as Gaza, Joppa, Dor, and Acco, but none was very good. There were also sea lanes linking the Mediterranean coast with Egypt and distant Tarshish (probably Spain). The other coastal water was the Gulf of Aqaba with its two ports—Ezion-geber for Transjordan, and Elath for west of the Jordan. Solomon’s fleet used Ezion-geber as its home port.<\/p>\n\n<p>In NT times things changed considerably. The Middle East produced commodities used by peoples farther west, especially the Romans. Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria handled both cargo and travelers. Smaller ports like those in Palestine and many others around the coast of Asia Minor provided a haven for ships. One ingenious scheme to avoid a 200-mile (321.8-kilometer) journey around the Greek peninsula was to drag small boats across the five-mile- (8-kilometer-) wide isthmus at Corinth. Even the largest ship in NT times was in danger from wind and storm at sea (Acts 27), so sea travel was undertaken preferably when the risk of storms was minimal, roughly from November to March. There was a lot of sea traffic in the Mediterranean Sea at appropriate seasons, largely for trade. Grain ships crossed regularly from Rome to Egypt and to the east.<\/p>\n<p>Ships were driven by sail power supplemented as necessary by oars operated by slaves. Some indication of the size of ships comes from the discovery of ancient wrecks and from Latin and Greek literature. An old dry dock 130 feet (39.6 meters) long found near Athens was once used for Greek war vessels, which were smaller than the cargo vessels. The Roman writer Lucian refers to an Alexandrian grain ship 180 feet (54.9 meters) long, suggesting a capacity of about 1,200 tons (1,088.6 metric tons). Paul’s ship carried 276 persons (Acts 27:37). Modern underwater archaeology is providing valuable information about these ancient ships.<\/p>\n<h5>Reasons for Travel<\/h5>\n<p>The most important reason for travel in NT times was for trade and commerce, which involved far more than merely transporting goods. There were agents, supervisors, insurers of cargo, bankers, and a whole range of people involved in the acquisition and safe delivery of the cargo.<\/p>\n<p>Military travel was considerable. A wide variety of tasks had to be undertaken in the way of reconnaissance, procuring of supplies, forward arrangements for the bivouacking of troops, and the transport of both troops and equipment.<\/p>\n<p>Some travelers were tradespeople changing their place of employment, like Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2-3). Aquila had traveled from Pontus on the Black Sea to Rome and then, in a time of persecution, he had fled to Corinth with his wife. Many others traveled for similar reasons.<\/p>\n<p>People on religious pilgrimage traveled by land or sea. Jews from many lands journeyed to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivities (cf. Acts 2:5-11). Non-Jews went to religious centers at Ephesus, Athens, and Eleusis, where there were important temples. Many minor temples also attracted pilgrims. The construction of new temples and a variety of government administration buildings brought craftsmen from afar. Often the materials used in construction had to be transported to the site. Some people made trips for health reasons to temples famed for healing miracles or to enjoy the benefits of hot springs like those at Capernaum or Tiberias. Athletes traveled to centers for important contests like the Olympic games, and crowds of people flocked to witness the spectacle. Some travelers were students or teachers going to great centers of learning—the universities of those times. Yet others traveled as official emissaries bearing important government and commercial documents. Despite all this activity, vast numbers of ordinary citizens hardly ever traveled more than a few miles from their homes.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRAVEL<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinOldTestamentTimes\">Travel in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Several accounts depict the people of Israel moving over restricted areas to graze their flocks. Joseph’s brothers took their flocks from the south of the land up to Shechem and then to Dothan (Gn 37:12-17), but this was a mere 60 miles (96.5 kilometers). David traveled around Palestine and even went to Moab (1 Sm 22:3). The Danites moved from their home southwest of Jerusalem to the north, just south of the Lebanon Mountains (Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<p>Examples of travel for pasturage, migration, and protection could be multiplied. Such travelers would normally walk, though the ass was used both for riding and as a pack animal. The ox was employed for transporting heavy loads and sometimes for people (Gn 46:5). Later the camel came into general use (1 Kgs 10:2; 2 Kgs 8:9). Little is known of resting places for travelers in OT times. There are only a few references to a “lodging place” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malon<\/span>) in OT narratives (Gn 42:27; 43:21; Ex 4:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinNewTestamentTimes\">Travel in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman world knew a great deal of travel: to fulfill religious obligations at festival time, for trade, for government administration, for military purposes. Not the least among first-century travelers were the early Christian missionaries.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Roman peace and authority and the construction of well-made stone roads made travel relatively safe and quick. The modes of travel improved over that known in OT times. Long distances were traveled within the Roman Empire over good roads and in comparative safety. There were some hazards, however, notably in sea travel, from wind, storms, and pirates (Acts 15:39; 18:18-22; Rom 15:24-25; 2 Cor 11:25-26). Paul’s sea journey to Rome, for example, was perilous (Acts 27:1–28:14).<\/p>\n<p>The NT mentions a number of journeys on foot. Mary journeyed from Galilee to Judea to visit Elizabeth (Lk 1:39-40, 56). The baby Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the census (2:1-7); Jesus was brought to Jerusalem to comply with the Jewish purification law (v 22). Thus three trips were made from Nazareth to Jerusalem, a distance of about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers), from the time of Jesus’ conception to Mary’s purification. The annual Passover visit was made by Joseph and Mary (vv 41-51). Other journeys are mentioned (Jn 2:13; 5:1; 7:1-10; 12:1). Jesus himself walked to Jericho from Galilee (Mk 1:1-11) and also to the region of Tyre and Sidon (7:24). He was in Samaria more than once (Lk 17:11; Jn 4:4). His last journey to Jerusalem was via Jericho and up through the hills to Jerusalem (Mk 10:1, 46; 11:1). His last journey after the resurrection was to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\n<p>Paul traveled by sea on each of his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-14; 15:41–18:22; 18:23–21:17), generally accompanied by friends. He also made many journeys on foot in Palestine, Asia Minor, and the Greek peninsula. But not all travel was on foot in NT times. The ass, used for carrying loads, often carried people. Jesus once rode from Bethphage to Jerusalem, a short but highly symbolic journey (Mt 21:2-7; Mk 11:1-11; Jn 12:12-15). When Joseph traveled with his pregnant wife, Mary, to Bethlehem for the census at the time of Jesus’ birth, Mary probably rode on an ass. The Ethiopian eunuch was riding in a chariot after worshiping at Jerusalem and was joined by Philip traveling on foot (Acts 8:26-38). Roman soldiers both marched and made wide use of horses. When Paul was brought to Caesarea from Jerusalem, mounts were prepared for him (23:23-24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandSeaLanes\">Roads and Sea Lanes<\/p>\n<p>The roads of biblical times figured prominently in the geography, topography, and history of Palestine—a land that served as a bridge between Egypt and centers of civilization and trade in the Middle East. Many of the roads were strategically important, both commercially and militarily. Some roads gained significance as pilgrim routes to facilitate travel to religious centers like Jerusalem. Roads in biblical times were of three main types: long-distance international roads, medium-distance intraregional roads, and a variety of roads inside each region or state.<\/p>\n<h5>Great International Roads<\/h5>\n<p>These linked the Mediterranean coast to the northern Tigris Valley and southern Mesopotamia. Some linked Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, while others led south to Egypt, either along the coast or east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and across the Sinai Peninsula. There were trade routes between Anatolia and Assyria early in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Apparently the military campaign referred to in Genesis 14 aimed to secure the great trade route, the King’s Highway, from northern Mesopotamia to Egypt. Military invaders and travelers from Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia would head across the hinterlands of Syria toward the coast before turning south into Palestine and Egypt. The advent of European powers, Greece and Rome, into the Middle East opened up another vast network of international roads for the peoples of the East. Until Roman times, these roads were not surfaced with stone but were cleared pathways. They were very rough, ungraded, and in wet weather, impassable in many places. But they were evidently well defined by “waymarks” and “guideposts” (Jer 31:21). With the coming of the Romans, important roads were built with deep foundations and with large blocks of flat stone at the surface. The remains of these roads are still seen in many places in the Middle East and in Europe. Distance markers or milestones were regularly placed along the roads.<\/p>\n<h5>International North-South Roads in Palestine<\/h5>\n<p>The roads that linked countries to the north with Egypt passed through Palestine, a natural land bridge. There were three major roads. The coastal road began in Damascus and passed via Hazor across the plain of Esdraelon, through the Megiddo Pass, down the coast past Gaza and into Egypt. This was probably “the way of the sea” (Is 9:1). The Sinai road led from Egypt into the southern Negev and then to Kadesh-barnea, Beersheba, Hebron, Jerusalem, Shechem, Acco, Tyre, and Sidon. The Red Sea road entered the Palestine area from the Gulf of Aqaba, where the ancient port of Elath and Solomon’s port of Ezion-geber stood (Nm 33:35; 2 Chr 8:17). From there it led through the mountainous areas of Transjordan, crossing the deep wadis and then north through the Hauran region to Damascus. This was the road taken by caravans from southern Arabia to Damascus, the ancient King’s Highway (Nm 20:17; 21:22).<\/p>\n<p>There were other north-south roads of lesser importance. One coastal road led from Joppa via Caesarea and Dor to Acco, where it linked with the Sinai road. Evidently it was not very significant until Roman times, when the port of Caesarea was built. The marshes in the plain of Sharon posed many problems. The plain of Esdraelon was also marshy and interrupted the roads north in bad seasons. A raised road across the swampy sections was eventually constructed. Another road led north from Hazor, branching off the main trunk road to Damascus. The Jordan Valley road skirted the southwestern part of Galilee and led down the Jordan Valley to Jericho.<\/p>\n<h5>East-West Roads<\/h5>\n<p>Several important roads ran east-west, intersecting the larger roads leading north. One such road led from Gaza to Beersheba and then down the Arabah, with an offshoot to Petra. Another led from Ashkelon, via Gath, to Hebron and on to En-gedi on the Dead Sea. Another road led from Joppa east up the valley of Aijalon (Jos 10:6-14) to Bethel and on to Jericho. One well-used road led from Joppa to Shechem, across the Jordan at Adam (3:16) and into Gilead in Transjordan. Other roads led from Acco eastward to Galilee and also up the coast to Tyre and Sidon. There were, indeed, numerous east-west roads that provided contact between various parts of Palestine. In Roman times, when the speedy movement of armies was essential, some of the old roads were greatly improved and new ones built.<\/p>\n<h5>Sea Lanes<\/h5>\n<p>The people of Israel, unlike the Phoenicians, seldom used the sea lanes. When Solomon planned to send ships down the Red Sea to Ophir (1 Kgs 9:26-28), he used Phoenician seamen. Jehoshaphat planned a similar expedition, but his ships were wrecked (22:48-49). Coastal traffic in OT times was in the hands of Philistines and Phoenicians. There were several ports along the Mediterranean Sea coast, such as Gaza, Joppa, Dor, and Acco, but none was very good. There were also sea lanes linking the Mediterranean coast with Egypt and distant Tarshish (probably Spain). The other coastal water was the Gulf of Aqaba with its two ports—Ezion-geber for Transjordan, and Elath for west of the Jordan. Solomon’s fleet used Ezion-geber as its home port.<\/p>\n\n<p>In NT times things changed considerably. The Middle East produced commodities used by peoples farther west, especially the Romans. Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria handled both cargo and travelers. Smaller ports like those in Palestine and many others around the coast of Asia Minor provided a haven for ships. One ingenious scheme to avoid a 200-mile (321.8-kilometer) journey around the Greek peninsula was to drag small boats across the five-mile- (8-kilometer-) wide isthmus at Corinth. Even the largest ship in NT times was in danger from wind and storm at sea (Acts 27), so sea travel was undertaken preferably when the risk of storms was minimal, roughly from November to March. There was a lot of sea traffic in the Mediterranean Sea at appropriate seasons, largely for trade. Grain ships crossed regularly from Rome to Egypt and to the east.<\/p>\n<p>Ships were driven by sail power supplemented as necessary by oars operated by slaves. Some indication of the size of ships comes from the discovery of ancient wrecks and from Latin and Greek literature. An old dry dock 130 feet (39.6 meters) long found near Athens was once used for Greek war vessels, which were smaller than the cargo vessels. The Roman writer Lucian refers to an Alexandrian grain ship 180 feet (54.9 meters) long, suggesting a capacity of about 1,200 tons (1,088.6 metric tons). Paul’s ship carried 276 persons (Acts 27:37). Modern underwater archaeology is providing valuable information about these ancient ships.<\/p>\n<h5>Reasons for Travel<\/h5>\n<p>The most important reason for travel in NT times was for trade and commerce, which involved far more than merely transporting goods. There were agents, supervisors, insurers of cargo, bankers, and a whole range of people involved in the acquisition and safe delivery of the cargo.<\/p>\n<p>Military travel was considerable. A wide variety of tasks had to be undertaken in the way of reconnaissance, procuring of supplies, forward arrangements for the bivouacking of troops, and the transport of both troops and equipment.<\/p>\n<p>Some travelers were tradespeople changing their place of employment, like Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2-3). Aquila had traveled from Pontus on the Black Sea to Rome and then, in a time of persecution, he had fled to Corinth with his wife. Many others traveled for similar reasons.<\/p>\n<p>People on religious pilgrimage traveled by land or sea. Jews from many lands journeyed to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivities (cf. Acts 2:5-11). Non-Jews went to religious centers at Ephesus, Athens, and Eleusis, where there were important temples. Many minor temples also attracted pilgrims. The construction of new temples and a variety of government administration buildings brought craftsmen from afar. Often the materials used in construction had to be transported to the site. Some people made trips for health reasons to temples famed for healing miracles or to enjoy the benefits of hot springs like those at Capernaum or Tiberias. Athletes traveled to centers for important contests like the Olympic games, and crowds of people flocked to witness the spectacle. Some travelers were students or teachers going to great centers of learning—the universities of those times. Yet others traveled as official emissaries bearing important government and commercial documents. Despite all this activity, vast numbers of ordinary citizens hardly ever traveled more than a few miles from their homes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRAVEL In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine. Travel in Old Testament Times Several accounts depict the peop...","summary_en":"TRAVEL In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine. Travel in Old Testament Times Several accounts depict the peop...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56347,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 15\"><strong>2:13<\/strong> <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to <em>Jerusalem<\/em> to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 15\"><strong>2:13<\/strong> <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to <em>Jerusalem<\/em> to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13 Passover, an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to Jerusalem to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.","summary_en":"2:13 Passover, an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to Jerusalem to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83973,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 15\"><strong>2:13<\/strong> <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to <em>Jerusalem<\/em> to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 15\"><strong>2:13<\/strong> <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to <em>Jerusalem<\/em> to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13 Passover, an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to Jerusalem to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.","summary_en":"2:13 Passover, an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to Jerusalem to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111599,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 15\"><strong>2:13<\/strong> <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to <em>Jerusalem<\/em> to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 15\"><strong>2:13<\/strong> <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to <em>Jerusalem<\/em> to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13 Passover, an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to Jerusalem to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.","summary_en":"2:13 Passover, an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to Jerusalem to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139225,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 15\"><strong>2:13<\/strong> <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to <em>Jerusalem<\/em> to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 15\"><strong>2:13<\/strong> <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to <em>Jerusalem<\/em> to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13 Passover, an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to Jerusalem to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.","summary_en":"2:13 Passover, an annual spring festival, commemorated Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12). Jews traveled to Jerusalem to participate in the festival (Deut 16:1-16). Because John refers to three Passover festivals (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55), many conclude that Jesus had a three-year public ministry.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62037,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Violation of the Sacred","title_en":"Violation of the Sacred","content_ro":"<h3>Violation of the Sacred<\/h3>\n<p>Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he entered the Temple with a whip and drove out the merchants and money changers who were defiling the holy space for their own profit (John 2:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>There can be no violations with respect to God’s holy presence, and that certainly included the Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple represented God’s presence in creation, so all of its rituals needed to reflect its status as sacred and set apart for God alone. This meant that no one could enter it to make offerings except those anointed for the task.<\/p>\n<p>One particularly egregious sin was when King Uzziah entered the Temple to burn incense (2 Chr 26:16). The kings of Israel (unlike kings of other ancient Near Eastern cultures) were excluded from the sacred space because they were anointed only for the secular function of government. The king of Israel was not a priest. He was not God’s representative in sacred matters nor (as in other cultures) a god himself. He was a servant of God taken from among his brothers to administer the covenant in the community (Deut 17:18-20). So when King Uzziah tried to claim a priestly function that was not rightfully his, he violated the sanctuary that God had set apart for his own presence. In terms of the function of the Temple, this violation was no trivial matter.<\/p>\n<p>David provides a counterpoint to Uzziah’s arrogance (1 Sam 21:1-9). When his men were hungry, he knew they could find bread at the Tabernacle, but instead of claiming it for himself, he made his request to the priest, who gave them the holy bread with his blessing. By contrast, when Uzziah entered the Temple and violated this sacred space, his response was typical of arrogant human hearts (26:16). He assumed that, as king, he had the right to enter God’s sacred Temple. But he did not have that right, and he was judged with affliction by a skin disease and separation from daily life. The punishment was appropriate to the arrogance of his sin.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah-like sacrilege remains an ever-present temptation. Any conduct that fails to glorify God is a violation of his sacred space. All of human history consists of the story of God restoring the entire heavens and earth to be the place of his dwelling. In the new covenant through Jesus Christ, God’s sacred space is not limited to a Temple in Jerusalem or any other building; he sets apart for himself the lives of people who trust in him (1 Cor 6:19-20). In his grace, God has made the people of the new covenant to be his temple on earth (1 Pet 2:4-5), to be the space where his holiness enters creation. History will be complete when all of heaven and earth becomes the temple of God (Isa 65:17-18; Rev 21:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6; Exod 19:12-13; 31:14-15; Lev 10:1-20; 24:16-17; Num 1:51; 15:32-36; 2 Chr 26:16-21; 1 Cor 6:19-20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Violation of the Sacred<\/h3>\n<p>Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he entered the Temple with a whip and drove out the merchants and money changers who were defiling the holy space for their own profit (John 2:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>There can be no violations with respect to God’s holy presence, and that certainly included the Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple represented God’s presence in creation, so all of its rituals needed to reflect its status as sacred and set apart for God alone. This meant that no one could enter it to make offerings except those anointed for the task.<\/p>\n<p>One particularly egregious sin was when King Uzziah entered the Temple to burn incense (2 Chr 26:16). The kings of Israel (unlike kings of other ancient Near Eastern cultures) were excluded from the sacred space because they were anointed only for the secular function of government. The king of Israel was not a priest. He was not God’s representative in sacred matters nor (as in other cultures) a god himself. He was a servant of God taken from among his brothers to administer the covenant in the community (Deut 17:18-20). So when King Uzziah tried to claim a priestly function that was not rightfully his, he violated the sanctuary that God had set apart for his own presence. In terms of the function of the Temple, this violation was no trivial matter.<\/p>\n<p>David provides a counterpoint to Uzziah’s arrogance (1 Sam 21:1-9). When his men were hungry, he knew they could find bread at the Tabernacle, but instead of claiming it for himself, he made his request to the priest, who gave them the holy bread with his blessing. By contrast, when Uzziah entered the Temple and violated this sacred space, his response was typical of arrogant human hearts (26:16). He assumed that, as king, he had the right to enter God’s sacred Temple. But he did not have that right, and he was judged with affliction by a skin disease and separation from daily life. The punishment was appropriate to the arrogance of his sin.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah-like sacrilege remains an ever-present temptation. Any conduct that fails to glorify God is a violation of his sacred space. All of human history consists of the story of God restoring the entire heavens and earth to be the place of his dwelling. In the new covenant through Jesus Christ, God’s sacred space is not limited to a Temple in Jerusalem or any other building; he sets apart for himself the lives of people who trust in him (1 Cor 6:19-20). In his grace, God has made the people of the new covenant to be his temple on earth (1 Pet 2:4-5), to be the space where his holiness enters creation. History will be complete when all of heaven and earth becomes the temple of God (Isa 65:17-18; Rev 21:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6; Exod 19:12-13; 31:14-15; Lev 10:1-20; 24:16-17; Num 1:51; 15:32-36; 2 Chr 26:16-21; 1 Cor 6:19-20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Violation of the Sacred Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he enter...","summary_en":"Violation of the Sacred Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he enter...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63504,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Anger","title_en":"Anger","content_ro":"<h3>Anger<\/h3>\n<p>Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out of the Temple (Mark 11:15-17; John 2:13-16). People must learn to distinguish righteous anger from unrighteous anger, though it is often hard to tell the two apart. Unrighteous anger is only concerned to protect or promote oneself (e.g., Gen 4:3-8; 1 Sam 18:8-9; 1 Kgs 21:3-4; 2 Kgs 5:11; 2 Chr 25:10; Jon 4). Righteous anger reflects God’s hatred of evil and love of justice (e.g., Exod 32; Num 11:1, 10; see also Nah 1:3; Rom 9:22). The wise person reads the circumstances and discerns whether and to what degree to express anger (see also Prov 22:24; Eccl 7:9; Matt 5:22; Rom 12:19; Eph 4:26-27, 31; Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 18:8-11; 1 Kgs 21:3-16; Pss 30:5; 37:8; Prov 12:16; 14:29; 15:1, 18; 16:14; 19:11-12, 19; 22:24-25; 27:4; Eccl 7:9; Nah 1:2-3; Matt 5:22; Eph 4:26-27, 31-32; 1 Tim 2:8; Titus 1:7; Jas 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Anger<\/h3>\n<p>Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out of the Temple (Mark 11:15-17; John 2:13-16). People must learn to distinguish righteous anger from unrighteous anger, though it is often hard to tell the two apart. Unrighteous anger is only concerned to protect or promote oneself (e.g., Gen 4:3-8; 1 Sam 18:8-9; 1 Kgs 21:3-4; 2 Kgs 5:11; 2 Chr 25:10; Jon 4). Righteous anger reflects God’s hatred of evil and love of justice (e.g., Exod 32; Num 11:1, 10; see also Nah 1:3; Rom 9:22). The wise person reads the circumstances and discerns whether and to what degree to express anger (see also Prov 22:24; Eccl 7:9; Matt 5:22; Rom 12:19; Eph 4:26-27, 31; Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 18:8-11; 1 Kgs 21:3-16; Pss 30:5; 37:8; Prov 12:16; 14:29; 15:1, 18; 16:14; 19:11-12, 19; 22:24-25; 27:4; Eccl 7:9; Nah 1:2-3; Matt 5:22; Eph 4:26-27, 31-32; 1 Tim 2:8; Titus 1:7; Jas 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Anger Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16). Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out...","summary_en":"Anger Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16). Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89663,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Violation of the Sacred","title_en":"Violation of the Sacred","content_ro":"<h3>Violation of the Sacred<\/h3>\n<p>Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he entered the Temple with a whip and drove out the merchants and money changers who were defiling the holy space for their own profit (John 2:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>There can be no violations with respect to God’s holy presence, and that certainly included the Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple represented God’s presence in creation, so all of its rituals needed to reflect its status as sacred and set apart for God alone. This meant that no one could enter it to make offerings except those anointed for the task.<\/p>\n<p>One particularly egregious sin was when King Uzziah entered the Temple to burn incense (2 Chr 26:16). The kings of Israel (unlike kings of other ancient Near Eastern cultures) were excluded from the sacred space because they were anointed only for the secular function of government. The king of Israel was not a priest. He was not God’s representative in sacred matters nor (as in other cultures) a god himself. He was a servant of God taken from among his brothers to administer the covenant in the community (Deut 17:18-20). So when King Uzziah tried to claim a priestly function that was not rightfully his, he violated the sanctuary that God had set apart for his own presence. In terms of the function of the Temple, this violation was no trivial matter.<\/p>\n<p>David provides a counterpoint to Uzziah’s arrogance (1 Sam 21:1-9). When his men were hungry, he knew they could find bread at the Tabernacle, but instead of claiming it for himself, he made his request to the priest, who gave them the holy bread with his blessing. By contrast, when Uzziah entered the Temple and violated this sacred space, his response was typical of arrogant human hearts (26:16). He assumed that, as king, he had the right to enter God’s sacred Temple. But he did not have that right, and he was judged with affliction by a skin disease and separation from daily life. The punishment was appropriate to the arrogance of his sin.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah-like sacrilege remains an ever-present temptation. Any conduct that fails to glorify God is a violation of his sacred space. All of human history consists of the story of God restoring the entire heavens and earth to be the place of his dwelling. In the new covenant through Jesus Christ, God’s sacred space is not limited to a Temple in Jerusalem or any other building; he sets apart for himself the lives of people who trust in him (1 Cor 6:19-20). In his grace, God has made the people of the new covenant to be his temple on earth (1 Pet 2:4-5), to be the space where his holiness enters creation. History will be complete when all of heaven and earth becomes the temple of God (Isa 65:17-18; Rev 21:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6; Exod 19:12-13; 31:14-15; Lev 10:1-20; 24:16-17; Num 1:51; 15:32-36; 2 Chr 26:16-21; 1 Cor 6:19-20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Violation of the Sacred<\/h3>\n<p>Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he entered the Temple with a whip and drove out the merchants and money changers who were defiling the holy space for their own profit (John 2:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>There can be no violations with respect to God’s holy presence, and that certainly included the Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple represented God’s presence in creation, so all of its rituals needed to reflect its status as sacred and set apart for God alone. This meant that no one could enter it to make offerings except those anointed for the task.<\/p>\n<p>One particularly egregious sin was when King Uzziah entered the Temple to burn incense (2 Chr 26:16). The kings of Israel (unlike kings of other ancient Near Eastern cultures) were excluded from the sacred space because they were anointed only for the secular function of government. The king of Israel was not a priest. He was not God’s representative in sacred matters nor (as in other cultures) a god himself. He was a servant of God taken from among his brothers to administer the covenant in the community (Deut 17:18-20). So when King Uzziah tried to claim a priestly function that was not rightfully his, he violated the sanctuary that God had set apart for his own presence. In terms of the function of the Temple, this violation was no trivial matter.<\/p>\n<p>David provides a counterpoint to Uzziah’s arrogance (1 Sam 21:1-9). When his men were hungry, he knew they could find bread at the Tabernacle, but instead of claiming it for himself, he made his request to the priest, who gave them the holy bread with his blessing. By contrast, when Uzziah entered the Temple and violated this sacred space, his response was typical of arrogant human hearts (26:16). He assumed that, as king, he had the right to enter God’s sacred Temple. But he did not have that right, and he was judged with affliction by a skin disease and separation from daily life. The punishment was appropriate to the arrogance of his sin.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah-like sacrilege remains an ever-present temptation. Any conduct that fails to glorify God is a violation of his sacred space. All of human history consists of the story of God restoring the entire heavens and earth to be the place of his dwelling. In the new covenant through Jesus Christ, God’s sacred space is not limited to a Temple in Jerusalem or any other building; he sets apart for himself the lives of people who trust in him (1 Cor 6:19-20). In his grace, God has made the people of the new covenant to be his temple on earth (1 Pet 2:4-5), to be the space where his holiness enters creation. History will be complete when all of heaven and earth becomes the temple of God (Isa 65:17-18; Rev 21:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6; Exod 19:12-13; 31:14-15; Lev 10:1-20; 24:16-17; Num 1:51; 15:32-36; 2 Chr 26:16-21; 1 Cor 6:19-20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Violation of the Sacred Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he enter...","summary_en":"Violation of the Sacred Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he enter...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91130,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Anger","title_en":"Anger","content_ro":"<h3>Anger<\/h3>\n<p>Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out of the Temple (Mark 11:15-17; John 2:13-16). People must learn to distinguish righteous anger from unrighteous anger, though it is often hard to tell the two apart. Unrighteous anger is only concerned to protect or promote oneself (e.g., Gen 4:3-8; 1 Sam 18:8-9; 1 Kgs 21:3-4; 2 Kgs 5:11; 2 Chr 25:10; Jon 4). Righteous anger reflects God’s hatred of evil and love of justice (e.g., Exod 32; Num 11:1, 10; see also Nah 1:3; Rom 9:22). The wise person reads the circumstances and discerns whether and to what degree to express anger (see also Prov 22:24; Eccl 7:9; Matt 5:22; Rom 12:19; Eph 4:26-27, 31; Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 18:8-11; 1 Kgs 21:3-16; Pss 30:5; 37:8; Prov 12:16; 14:29; 15:1, 18; 16:14; 19:11-12, 19; 22:24-25; 27:4; Eccl 7:9; Nah 1:2-3; Matt 5:22; Eph 4:26-27, 31-32; 1 Tim 2:8; Titus 1:7; Jas 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Anger<\/h3>\n<p>Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out of the Temple (Mark 11:15-17; John 2:13-16). People must learn to distinguish righteous anger from unrighteous anger, though it is often hard to tell the two apart. Unrighteous anger is only concerned to protect or promote oneself (e.g., Gen 4:3-8; 1 Sam 18:8-9; 1 Kgs 21:3-4; 2 Kgs 5:11; 2 Chr 25:10; Jon 4). Righteous anger reflects God’s hatred of evil and love of justice (e.g., Exod 32; Num 11:1, 10; see also Nah 1:3; Rom 9:22). The wise person reads the circumstances and discerns whether and to what degree to express anger (see also Prov 22:24; Eccl 7:9; Matt 5:22; Rom 12:19; Eph 4:26-27, 31; Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 18:8-11; 1 Kgs 21:3-16; Pss 30:5; 37:8; Prov 12:16; 14:29; 15:1, 18; 16:14; 19:11-12, 19; 22:24-25; 27:4; Eccl 7:9; Nah 1:2-3; Matt 5:22; Eph 4:26-27, 31-32; 1 Tim 2:8; Titus 1:7; Jas 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Anger Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16). Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out...","summary_en":"Anger Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16). Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117289,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Violation of the Sacred","title_en":"Violation of the Sacred","content_ro":"<h3>Violation of the Sacred<\/h3>\n<p>Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he entered the Temple with a whip and drove out the merchants and money changers who were defiling the holy space for their own profit (John 2:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>There can be no violations with respect to God’s holy presence, and that certainly included the Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple represented God’s presence in creation, so all of its rituals needed to reflect its status as sacred and set apart for God alone. This meant that no one could enter it to make offerings except those anointed for the task.<\/p>\n<p>One particularly egregious sin was when King Uzziah entered the Temple to burn incense (2 Chr 26:16). The kings of Israel (unlike kings of other ancient Near Eastern cultures) were excluded from the sacred space because they were anointed only for the secular function of government. The king of Israel was not a priest. He was not God’s representative in sacred matters nor (as in other cultures) a god himself. He was a servant of God taken from among his brothers to administer the covenant in the community (Deut 17:18-20). So when King Uzziah tried to claim a priestly function that was not rightfully his, he violated the sanctuary that God had set apart for his own presence. In terms of the function of the Temple, this violation was no trivial matter.<\/p>\n<p>David provides a counterpoint to Uzziah’s arrogance (1 Sam 21:1-9). When his men were hungry, he knew they could find bread at the Tabernacle, but instead of claiming it for himself, he made his request to the priest, who gave them the holy bread with his blessing. By contrast, when Uzziah entered the Temple and violated this sacred space, his response was typical of arrogant human hearts (26:16). He assumed that, as king, he had the right to enter God’s sacred Temple. But he did not have that right, and he was judged with affliction by a skin disease and separation from daily life. The punishment was appropriate to the arrogance of his sin.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah-like sacrilege remains an ever-present temptation. Any conduct that fails to glorify God is a violation of his sacred space. All of human history consists of the story of God restoring the entire heavens and earth to be the place of his dwelling. In the new covenant through Jesus Christ, God’s sacred space is not limited to a Temple in Jerusalem or any other building; he sets apart for himself the lives of people who trust in him (1 Cor 6:19-20). In his grace, God has made the people of the new covenant to be his temple on earth (1 Pet 2:4-5), to be the space where his holiness enters creation. History will be complete when all of heaven and earth becomes the temple of God (Isa 65:17-18; Rev 21:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6; Exod 19:12-13; 31:14-15; Lev 10:1-20; 24:16-17; Num 1:51; 15:32-36; 2 Chr 26:16-21; 1 Cor 6:19-20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Violation of the Sacred<\/h3>\n<p>Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he entered the Temple with a whip and drove out the merchants and money changers who were defiling the holy space for their own profit (John 2:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>There can be no violations with respect to God’s holy presence, and that certainly included the Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple represented God’s presence in creation, so all of its rituals needed to reflect its status as sacred and set apart for God alone. This meant that no one could enter it to make offerings except those anointed for the task.<\/p>\n<p>One particularly egregious sin was when King Uzziah entered the Temple to burn incense (2 Chr 26:16). The kings of Israel (unlike kings of other ancient Near Eastern cultures) were excluded from the sacred space because they were anointed only for the secular function of government. The king of Israel was not a priest. He was not God’s representative in sacred matters nor (as in other cultures) a god himself. He was a servant of God taken from among his brothers to administer the covenant in the community (Deut 17:18-20). So when King Uzziah tried to claim a priestly function that was not rightfully his, he violated the sanctuary that God had set apart for his own presence. In terms of the function of the Temple, this violation was no trivial matter.<\/p>\n<p>David provides a counterpoint to Uzziah’s arrogance (1 Sam 21:1-9). When his men were hungry, he knew they could find bread at the Tabernacle, but instead of claiming it for himself, he made his request to the priest, who gave them the holy bread with his blessing. By contrast, when Uzziah entered the Temple and violated this sacred space, his response was typical of arrogant human hearts (26:16). He assumed that, as king, he had the right to enter God’s sacred Temple. But he did not have that right, and he was judged with affliction by a skin disease and separation from daily life. The punishment was appropriate to the arrogance of his sin.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah-like sacrilege remains an ever-present temptation. Any conduct that fails to glorify God is a violation of his sacred space. All of human history consists of the story of God restoring the entire heavens and earth to be the place of his dwelling. In the new covenant through Jesus Christ, God’s sacred space is not limited to a Temple in Jerusalem or any other building; he sets apart for himself the lives of people who trust in him (1 Cor 6:19-20). In his grace, God has made the people of the new covenant to be his temple on earth (1 Pet 2:4-5), to be the space where his holiness enters creation. History will be complete when all of heaven and earth becomes the temple of God (Isa 65:17-18; Rev 21:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6; Exod 19:12-13; 31:14-15; Lev 10:1-20; 24:16-17; Num 1:51; 15:32-36; 2 Chr 26:16-21; 1 Cor 6:19-20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Violation of the Sacred Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he enter...","summary_en":"Violation of the Sacred Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he enter...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118756,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Anger","title_en":"Anger","content_ro":"<h3>Anger<\/h3>\n<p>Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out of the Temple (Mark 11:15-17; John 2:13-16). People must learn to distinguish righteous anger from unrighteous anger, though it is often hard to tell the two apart. Unrighteous anger is only concerned to protect or promote oneself (e.g., Gen 4:3-8; 1 Sam 18:8-9; 1 Kgs 21:3-4; 2 Kgs 5:11; 2 Chr 25:10; Jon 4). Righteous anger reflects God’s hatred of evil and love of justice (e.g., Exod 32; Num 11:1, 10; see also Nah 1:3; Rom 9:22). The wise person reads the circumstances and discerns whether and to what degree to express anger (see also Prov 22:24; Eccl 7:9; Matt 5:22; Rom 12:19; Eph 4:26-27, 31; Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 18:8-11; 1 Kgs 21:3-16; Pss 30:5; 37:8; Prov 12:16; 14:29; 15:1, 18; 16:14; 19:11-12, 19; 22:24-25; 27:4; Eccl 7:9; Nah 1:2-3; Matt 5:22; Eph 4:26-27, 31-32; 1 Tim 2:8; Titus 1:7; Jas 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Anger<\/h3>\n<p>Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out of the Temple (Mark 11:15-17; John 2:13-16). People must learn to distinguish righteous anger from unrighteous anger, though it is often hard to tell the two apart. Unrighteous anger is only concerned to protect or promote oneself (e.g., Gen 4:3-8; 1 Sam 18:8-9; 1 Kgs 21:3-4; 2 Kgs 5:11; 2 Chr 25:10; Jon 4). Righteous anger reflects God’s hatred of evil and love of justice (e.g., Exod 32; Num 11:1, 10; see also Nah 1:3; Rom 9:22). The wise person reads the circumstances and discerns whether and to what degree to express anger (see also Prov 22:24; Eccl 7:9; Matt 5:22; Rom 12:19; Eph 4:26-27, 31; Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 18:8-11; 1 Kgs 21:3-16; Pss 30:5; 37:8; Prov 12:16; 14:29; 15:1, 18; 16:14; 19:11-12, 19; 22:24-25; 27:4; Eccl 7:9; Nah 1:2-3; Matt 5:22; Eph 4:26-27, 31-32; 1 Tim 2:8; Titus 1:7; Jas 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Anger Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16). Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out...","summary_en":"Anger Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16). Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144915,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Violation of the Sacred","title_en":"Violation of the Sacred","content_ro":"<h3>Violation of the Sacred<\/h3>\n<p>Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he entered the Temple with a whip and drove out the merchants and money changers who were defiling the holy space for their own profit (John 2:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>There can be no violations with respect to God’s holy presence, and that certainly included the Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple represented God’s presence in creation, so all of its rituals needed to reflect its status as sacred and set apart for God alone. This meant that no one could enter it to make offerings except those anointed for the task.<\/p>\n<p>One particularly egregious sin was when King Uzziah entered the Temple to burn incense (2 Chr 26:16). The kings of Israel (unlike kings of other ancient Near Eastern cultures) were excluded from the sacred space because they were anointed only for the secular function of government. The king of Israel was not a priest. He was not God’s representative in sacred matters nor (as in other cultures) a god himself. He was a servant of God taken from among his brothers to administer the covenant in the community (Deut 17:18-20). So when King Uzziah tried to claim a priestly function that was not rightfully his, he violated the sanctuary that God had set apart for his own presence. In terms of the function of the Temple, this violation was no trivial matter.<\/p>\n<p>David provides a counterpoint to Uzziah’s arrogance (1 Sam 21:1-9). When his men were hungry, he knew they could find bread at the Tabernacle, but instead of claiming it for himself, he made his request to the priest, who gave them the holy bread with his blessing. By contrast, when Uzziah entered the Temple and violated this sacred space, his response was typical of arrogant human hearts (26:16). He assumed that, as king, he had the right to enter God’s sacred Temple. But he did not have that right, and he was judged with affliction by a skin disease and separation from daily life. The punishment was appropriate to the arrogance of his sin.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah-like sacrilege remains an ever-present temptation. Any conduct that fails to glorify God is a violation of his sacred space. All of human history consists of the story of God restoring the entire heavens and earth to be the place of his dwelling. In the new covenant through Jesus Christ, God’s sacred space is not limited to a Temple in Jerusalem or any other building; he sets apart for himself the lives of people who trust in him (1 Cor 6:19-20). In his grace, God has made the people of the new covenant to be his temple on earth (1 Pet 2:4-5), to be the space where his holiness enters creation. History will be complete when all of heaven and earth becomes the temple of God (Isa 65:17-18; Rev 21:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6; Exod 19:12-13; 31:14-15; Lev 10:1-20; 24:16-17; Num 1:51; 15:32-36; 2 Chr 26:16-21; 1 Cor 6:19-20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Violation of the Sacred<\/h3>\n<p>Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he entered the Temple with a whip and drove out the merchants and money changers who were defiling the holy space for their own profit (John 2:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>There can be no violations with respect to God’s holy presence, and that certainly included the Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple represented God’s presence in creation, so all of its rituals needed to reflect its status as sacred and set apart for God alone. This meant that no one could enter it to make offerings except those anointed for the task.<\/p>\n<p>One particularly egregious sin was when King Uzziah entered the Temple to burn incense (2 Chr 26:16). The kings of Israel (unlike kings of other ancient Near Eastern cultures) were excluded from the sacred space because they were anointed only for the secular function of government. The king of Israel was not a priest. He was not God’s representative in sacred matters nor (as in other cultures) a god himself. He was a servant of God taken from among his brothers to administer the covenant in the community (Deut 17:18-20). So when King Uzziah tried to claim a priestly function that was not rightfully his, he violated the sanctuary that God had set apart for his own presence. In terms of the function of the Temple, this violation was no trivial matter.<\/p>\n<p>David provides a counterpoint to Uzziah’s arrogance (1 Sam 21:1-9). When his men were hungry, he knew they could find bread at the Tabernacle, but instead of claiming it for himself, he made his request to the priest, who gave them the holy bread with his blessing. By contrast, when Uzziah entered the Temple and violated this sacred space, his response was typical of arrogant human hearts (26:16). He assumed that, as king, he had the right to enter God’s sacred Temple. But he did not have that right, and he was judged with affliction by a skin disease and separation from daily life. The punishment was appropriate to the arrogance of his sin.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah-like sacrilege remains an ever-present temptation. Any conduct that fails to glorify God is a violation of his sacred space. All of human history consists of the story of God restoring the entire heavens and earth to be the place of his dwelling. In the new covenant through Jesus Christ, God’s sacred space is not limited to a Temple in Jerusalem or any other building; he sets apart for himself the lives of people who trust in him (1 Cor 6:19-20). In his grace, God has made the people of the new covenant to be his temple on earth (1 Pet 2:4-5), to be the space where his holiness enters creation. History will be complete when all of heaven and earth becomes the temple of God (Isa 65:17-18; Rev 21:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6; Exod 19:12-13; 31:14-15; Lev 10:1-20; 24:16-17; Num 1:51; 15:32-36; 2 Chr 26:16-21; 1 Cor 6:19-20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Violation of the Sacred Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he enter...","summary_en":"Violation of the Sacred Ever since Eden, humans have attempted to take God’s sacred space as their own (Gen 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Scripture shows us God’s anger and swift punishment when people treat his holy commands with contempt or casual disdain. Nadab and Abihu were supposed to lead Israel in proper worship, so when they ignored God’s specific instructions about priestly duties, they lost their lives for their sin (Lev 10:1-20). Jesus himself expressed the righteous anger of God when he enter...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146382,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Anger","title_en":"Anger","content_ro":"<h3>Anger<\/h3>\n<p>Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out of the Temple (Mark 11:15-17; John 2:13-16). People must learn to distinguish righteous anger from unrighteous anger, though it is often hard to tell the two apart. Unrighteous anger is only concerned to protect or promote oneself (e.g., Gen 4:3-8; 1 Sam 18:8-9; 1 Kgs 21:3-4; 2 Kgs 5:11; 2 Chr 25:10; Jon 4). Righteous anger reflects God’s hatred of evil and love of justice (e.g., Exod 32; Num 11:1, 10; see also Nah 1:3; Rom 9:22). The wise person reads the circumstances and discerns whether and to what degree to express anger (see also Prov 22:24; Eccl 7:9; Matt 5:22; Rom 12:19; Eph 4:26-27, 31; Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 18:8-11; 1 Kgs 21:3-16; Pss 30:5; 37:8; Prov 12:16; 14:29; 15:1, 18; 16:14; 19:11-12, 19; 22:24-25; 27:4; Eccl 7:9; Nah 1:2-3; Matt 5:22; Eph 4:26-27, 31-32; 1 Tim 2:8; Titus 1:7; Jas 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Anger<\/h3>\n<p>Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out of the Temple (Mark 11:15-17; John 2:13-16). People must learn to distinguish righteous anger from unrighteous anger, though it is often hard to tell the two apart. Unrighteous anger is only concerned to protect or promote oneself (e.g., Gen 4:3-8; 1 Sam 18:8-9; 1 Kgs 21:3-4; 2 Kgs 5:11; 2 Chr 25:10; Jon 4). Righteous anger reflects God’s hatred of evil and love of justice (e.g., Exod 32; Num 11:1, 10; see also Nah 1:3; Rom 9:22). The wise person reads the circumstances and discerns whether and to what degree to express anger (see also Prov 22:24; Eccl 7:9; Matt 5:22; Rom 12:19; Eph 4:26-27, 31; Jas 1:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 18:8-11; 1 Kgs 21:3-16; Pss 30:5; 37:8; Prov 12:16; 14:29; 15:1, 18; 16:14; 19:11-12, 19; 22:24-25; 27:4; Eccl 7:9; Nah 1:2-3; Matt 5:22; Eph 4:26-27, 31-32; 1 Tim 2:8; Titus 1:7; Jas 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Anger Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16). Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out...","summary_en":"Anger Wise people do not fly off the handle in anger. “People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness” (Prov 14:29). Because anger can cloud judgment, it is vitally important for the wise to reflect on their actions before responding (14:16). Although the book of Proverbs comments on anger only in a negative light, Scripture does not portray all anger as bad. Many psalms express anger (e.g., Ps 77), and Jesus became angry as he threw the money changers out...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":3626,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Banking Banker","title_en":"Banking Banker","content_ro":"<h3>BANKER, BANKING<\/h3>\n<p>A person who engages in loaning, exchanging, and issuing money. The development of interstate and international trade made it imperative to devise a method of banking to facilitate the transfer of funds. The appearance of coinage in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span> brought the money changer into being. The royal monopoly in commerce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 10:14-29) gave place to a system that resembled modern banking.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times money changers represented one aspect of the banking system. They spent their time converting Roman money into orthodox coinage for the temple half-shekel (Mt 17:24; 21:12; 25:27; Mk 11:15; Lk 19:23; Jn 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Those who lent money (lenders) and those who gave credit in financial transactions (creditors) were protected by a system of guarantees such as pieces of movable property or a pledge of some kind. Interest was theoretically forbidden by Israelite law (Ex 22:25; Dt 15:1-18), although the law was not always observed and exorbitant rates of interest were sometimes charged. Prophets and some national leaders deplored the practice (Neh 5:6-13; Ez 18:8, 13, 17; 22:12). Often, the people of Israel were afraid of their creditors (2 Kgs 4:1; Ps 109:11; Is 24:2; 50:1), who might invade their homes to recover a debt, even carrying off children as slaves (2 Kgs 4:1; Is 50:1). The parable of the creditor and the two debtors in Luke 7:41-42 represents a kindly creditor (cf. Mt 25:14-30; Lk 19:11-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BANKER, BANKING<\/h3>\n<p>A person who engages in loaning, exchanging, and issuing money. The development of interstate and international trade made it imperative to devise a method of banking to facilitate the transfer of funds. The appearance of coinage in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span> brought the money changer into being. The royal monopoly in commerce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 10:14-29) gave place to a system that resembled modern banking.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times money changers represented one aspect of the banking system. They spent their time converting Roman money into orthodox coinage for the temple half-shekel (Mt 17:24; 21:12; 25:27; Mk 11:15; Lk 19:23; Jn 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Those who lent money (lenders) and those who gave credit in financial transactions (creditors) were protected by a system of guarantees such as pieces of movable property or a pledge of some kind. Interest was theoretically forbidden by Israelite law (Ex 22:25; Dt 15:1-18), although the law was not always observed and exorbitant rates of interest were sometimes charged. Prophets and some national leaders deplored the practice (Neh 5:6-13; Ez 18:8, 13, 17; 22:12). Often, the people of Israel were afraid of their creditors (2 Kgs 4:1; Ps 109:11; Is 24:2; 50:1), who might invade their homes to recover a debt, even carrying off children as slaves (2 Kgs 4:1; Is 50:1). The parable of the creditor and the two debtors in Luke 7:41-42 represents a kindly creditor (cf. Mt 25:14-30; Lk 19:11-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BANKER, BANKING A person who engages in loaning, exchanging, and issuing money. The development of interstate and international trade made it imperative to devise a method of banking to facilitate the transfer of funds. The appearance of coinage in the seventh century BC brought the money changer into being. The royal monopoly in commerce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 10:14-29) gave place to a system that resembled modern banking. In NT times money changers represented one aspect of the banking system. T...","summary_en":"BANKER, BANKING A person who engages in loaning, exchanging, and issuing money. The development of interstate and international trade made it imperative to devise a method of banking to facilitate the transfer of funds. The appearance of coinage in the seventh century BC brought the money changer into being. The royal monopoly in commerce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 10:14-29) gave place to a system that resembled modern banking. In NT times money changers represented one aspect of the banking system. T...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13616,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Court of the Gentiles*","title_en":"Court of the Gentiles*","content_ro":"<h3>GENTILES*, Court of the<\/h3>\n<p>Large outer portion of King Herod’s temple complex. The court was of irregular oblong shape, somewhat broader at the north than the south. In that court, which was open to Gentiles as well as Jews, sacrificial animals were sold and money was exchanged. A warning was posted on a partition wall instructing Gentiles not to stray into the temple’s inner courts. Jesus’ cleansing of the temple probably occurred in the Court of the Gentiles (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-18; Jn 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GENTILES*, Court of the<\/h3>\n<p>Large outer portion of King Herod’s temple complex. The court was of irregular oblong shape, somewhat broader at the north than the south. In that court, which was open to Gentiles as well as Jews, sacrificial animals were sold and money was exchanged. A warning was posted on a partition wall instructing Gentiles not to stray into the temple’s inner courts. Jesus’ cleansing of the temple probably occurred in the Court of the Gentiles (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-18; Jn 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GENTILES*, Court of the Large outer portion of King Herod’s temple complex. The court was of irregular oblong shape, somewhat broader at the north than the south. In that court, which was open to Gentiles as well as Jews, sacrificial animals were sold and money was exchanged. A warning was posted on a partition wall instructing Gentiles not to stray into the temple’s inner courts. Jesus’ cleansing of the temple probably occurred in the Court of the Gentiles (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-18; Jn 2:14-...","summary_en":"GENTILES*, Court of the Large outer portion of King Herod’s temple complex. The court was of irregular oblong shape, somewhat broader at the north than the south. In that court, which was open to Gentiles as well as Jews, sacrificial animals were sold and money was exchanged. A warning was posted on a partition wall instructing Gentiles not to stray into the temple’s inner courts. Jesus’ cleansing of the temple probably occurred in the Court of the Gentiles (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-18; Jn 2:14-...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24023,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Malachi","title_en":"Book of Malachi","content_ro":"<h3>MALACHI, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Yet it would be most unusual for the Jews to preserve a prophetic book without explicitly attaching to it the name of the author. All of the other major and minor prophets—including Obadiah—are named after a particular prophet. Moreover, “messenger of the Lord” would be a most appropriate name for a prophet (cf. 2 Chr 36:15-16; Hg 1:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>During the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, the struggling Jewish community in Judah was greatly assisted by the return of Ezra and Nehemiah. In 458 <span>BC<\/span> Ezra was encouraged by King Artaxerxes of Persia to lead a group of exiles back to Jerusalem and to institute religious reform. About 13 years later, in 445 <span>BC<\/span>, a high-ranking government official named Nehemiah was allowed to go to Jerusalem to rebuild the city walls, a task he accomplished in 52 days (Neh 6:15). As governor, Nehemiah led the people in a financial reform that provided for the poor and encouraged tithing to support the priests and Levites (5:2-13; 10:35-39). Like Ezra, Nehemiah urged the people to keep the Sabbath and avoid intermarrying with pagan neighbors. After a 12-year term, Nehemiah returned to Persia and the spiritual condition of Judah deteriorated. Perhaps discouraged by their lack of political power, tithing became sporadic, the Sabbath was not kept, intermarriage was common, and even the priests could not be trusted. When Nehemiah came back to Jerusalem sometime later, he had to take firm action to straighten out the situation (13:6-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Since Malachi had to deal with the same sins mentioned in Nehemiah 13 (see Mal 1:6-14; 2:14-16; 3:8-11), it is likely that the prophet ministered either during Nehemiah’s second term as governor or in the years just before his return. The reference to “the governor” in Malachi 1:8 implies that someone other than Nehemiah was in office, so it may be best to place Malachi just after 433 <span>BC<\/span>, the year Nehemiah had returned to Persia.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheology\">Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>Malachi was written to shake the people of Judah from their spiritual lethargy and to warn them that judgment was coming unless they repented. The people doubted God’s love (1:2) and justice (2:17) and did not take his commands seriously (1:6; 3:14-18). Yet God was “a great King” (1:14) with a great name that was to be feared even beyond the border of Israel (vv 5, 11). Malachi repeatedly urged both the priests and the people to revere God and give him the honor he deserved. God was Israel’s Father and Creator (2:10), but the nation showed contempt for his name (1:6; 3:5). In response to this contempt, God would send his messenger to announce the Day of the Lord (3:1). John the Baptist did call the nation to repentance, and Christ came to cleanse the temple (Jn 2:14-15) and to establish the covenant (Mal 3:1-2). Most of the work of refining and purifying will take place at the Second Coming, when Christ returns to purify his people (cf. vv 2-4) and judge the wicked (4:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Great Love for Israel (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>To introduce the book, Malachi presents a contrast between God’s love for Israel and his hatred for Edom. Yet the assertion of God’s love is greeted with a strange question: “How have you loved us?” God loved Israel by entering into a covenant with the nation at Mt Sinai, just after he had freed them from the prison of Egypt. He had chosen them as his special people (cf. Gn 12:1-3; Ex 19:5-6), whereas the descendants of Esau were not chosen (cf. Rom 9:10-13). Both Israel and Edom endured invasion and destruction, but only Israel was restored and rebuilt after the exile. The people of Edom were driven from their homeland by the Nabateans between 550 and 400 <span>BC<\/span>, and they never regained their territory. Through the judgment of Edom, God demonstrated that he is the great Ruler over the nations (Mal 1:5) and that he will not forget Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Unacceptable Sacrifices of the Priests (1:6-14)<\/h5>\n<p>Although God deserved the honor and reverence of the Israelites, both the people and the priests openly disdained his laws and regulations. Strangely, it was the priests who led the way into disobedience. Sacrifices and offerings were supposed to atone for sin, but the animals offered by the priests only served to pollute or defile the altar (1:7, 12). According to Leviticus, animals with defects were unacceptable as sacrifices, but Malachi mentions that the priests were offering to the Lord animals that were stolen and mutilated, crippled and sick (v 13; cf. v 8). To emphasize their contempt, the Lord challenged the priests to bring comparable presents to the governor. Would they dare to insult him in this fashion and face sure rejection? Rather than having the priests continue to bring unfit sacrifices to the altar, the Lord asked them to close the temple doors entirely (v 10). Going through the motions never pleased God, either in ancient times (cf. Is 1:12-13) or modern. By calling the altar and its sacrifices “contemptible” (Mal 1:7, 12), the priests were no better than the wicked sons of Eli, whose disregard of the rules for sacrifices sent them to a premature death (cf. 1 Sm 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>In sharp contrast to the attitude of the priests stands the emphasis upon God’s greatness in Malachi 1:11 and 14. God is more powerful than the gods of other nations, and even if Israel’s priests and people dishonor the Lord, eventually pure offerings will be brought to God by believing Gentiles. Perhaps these offerings refer to prayer and praise (cf. Ps 19:14; Heb 13:15; Rv 5:8), but others interpret the reference more literally (cf. Is 56:7; 60:7). Peter may be alluding to this verse in connection with the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:35).<\/p>\n<h5>The Punishment of the Priests (2:1-9)<\/h5>\n<p>One of the functions of the priests was to pronounce blessings upon the people in the name of God, but their disgraceful behavior turned the blessings into curses (Mal 2:2). Because of the priests’ sinfulness and the poor condition of the animals, their sacrifices were also worthless, and the entrails of the animals will be spread on their faces as a sign that God holds them in contempt. The disgrace heaped upon the priests differs sharply from the honor enjoyed by Aaron and his descendants. Malachi refers to a covenant of life and peace (v 5) made with Levi and more particularly with Aaron’s grandson Phinehas, who courageously took action against the Jews involved in idolatry and immorality (Nm 25:10-13). In those days the priests revered the Lord and turned many from sin (Mal 2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Another responsibility of the priests was to teach the nation the law handed down by Moses (cf. Lv 10:11). Like prophets, they were messengers of the Lord (Mal 2:7) who were supposed to walk close to the Lord, but now the priests disregarded the law and were dishonest in handing down judicial decisions (Mal 2:9; cf. Lv 19:15).<\/p>\n<h5>The Unfaithfulness of the People (2:10-16)<\/h5>\n<p>In light of the attitude of the priests, it is not surprising to discover that the people at large were unfaithful to the Lord. God had formed Israel to be his special people, but the people had broken faith with him. A major factor in their unfaithfulness was intermarriage with foreigners, a sin mentioned in Ezra 9:1-2 and Nehemiah 13:23-29. By marrying pagan women, the men of Israel invariably began to worship pagan gods and turn from the Lord. When such intermarriage occurred, it sometimes followed the divorce of an Israelite wife. In Malachi 2:14-15 God underscores the sacred commitment that he himself witnesses when two people marry. If that marriage covenant is shattered by divorce, God is deeply displeased. And it is even more tragic if divorce became an excuse to marry a more attractive or appealing foreigner.<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Messenger of the Covenant (2:17–3:5)<\/h5>\n<p>The sins of the priests and the people did not go unnoticed, even though the nation doubted that God would take action (2:17). But the third chapter opens with the announcement that the messenger of the covenant will indeed come to his temple. His way will be prepared by another messenger—a prophecy of John the Baptist, who prepared the way for the ministry of Christ (cf. Mt 11:10; Mk 1:2-3). When Christ came, he revealed his anger when he cleansed the temple (cf. Jn 2:13-17) and denounced the scribes and Pharisees (cf. 9:39), but most of his purifying and refining work awaits the Second Coming. Someday the priests and Levites will bring acceptable sacrifices, as they did in the days of Moses and Phinehas (cf. Mal 3:3-4 and 2:4-5). Verse 5 of chapter 3 broadens the scope of the judgment to include the whole nation, as sorcerers, adulterers, and those who oppress the poor are condemned.<\/p>\n<h5>The Benefits of Faithful Tithing (3:6-12)<\/h5>\n<p>Another specific weakness of postexilic Judah was the failure of the people to bring their tithes to the Lord. Encouraged by Nehemiah, the nation promised to tithe faithfully (cf. Neh 10:37-39), but apparently their good intentions were short-lived (cf. 13:10-11). According to Malachi 3:8-9, the tithes of the nation were so dismal that the people were, in effect, robbing God and were therefore under a curse. In verses 10-12 Malachi challenges the nation to bring their tithes; then God would pour out his blessing upon them. Just as the opening of the “windows in heaven” meant the end of a famine in 2 Kings 7:2, 19, so God promises that their crops will be so abundant that they will run out of storage space. The hope of “blessing” in Malachi 3:10 and 12 provides welcome relief from the curses mentioned in 1:14, 2:2, 3:9, and 4:6.<\/p>\n<h5>The Day of the Lord (3:13–4:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Faced with the challenge of Malachi 3:10-12, the people of Israel responded in two different ways. One group denied that serving God brought any benefit (3:13-15), while another segment of the nation bowed low before him with deep reverence (vv 16-18). The unbelievers argued that obeying the Lord was useless and that arrogant and evil people were the ones who prospered. In response to their charge, Malachi noted that God would remember who the righteous were in the Day of Judgment. Although all of Israel was included in the promise made to Abraham, only those who genuinely believed would be God’s treasured possession (3:17; cf. Ex 19:5), with their names written in the Book of Life (cf. Mal 3:16). As for the arrogant and evildoers, the Day of the Lord will consume them and they will have no survivors (4:1). Those who revere the Lord will enjoy spiritual and physical health under the blessing and protection of God, who is called the “sun of righteousness” (v 2). Like calves just released from confinement, the righteous will trample down the wicked and triumph over them (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>In view of the judgment associated with the Day of the Lord, Malachi urged the people to repent. To do this they needed to heed the law of Moses and take seriously the decrees and commands given at Mt Sinai (4:4; cf. 3:7). Just as Elijah called on Israel to turn back to God, so a new “Elijah” will preach repentance to a rebellious nation. When John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ (cf. Mal 3:1), he ministered “in the spirit and power of Elijah” and begged the Jews to turn from their sin and humble themselves before God (Lk 1:17). If they refused to listen, the nation faced the prospect of total destruction, the curse placed upon the people of Canaan (cf. Jos 6:17-19) and upon the nation of Edom, whose collapse was described in Malachi 1:2-5.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MALACHI, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Yet it would be most unusual for the Jews to preserve a prophetic book without explicitly attaching to it the name of the author. All of the other major and minor prophets—including Obadiah—are named after a particular prophet. Moreover, “messenger of the Lord” would be a most appropriate name for a prophet (cf. 2 Chr 36:15-16; Hg 1:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>During the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, the struggling Jewish community in Judah was greatly assisted by the return of Ezra and Nehemiah. In 458 <span>BC<\/span> Ezra was encouraged by King Artaxerxes of Persia to lead a group of exiles back to Jerusalem and to institute religious reform. About 13 years later, in 445 <span>BC<\/span>, a high-ranking government official named Nehemiah was allowed to go to Jerusalem to rebuild the city walls, a task he accomplished in 52 days (Neh 6:15). As governor, Nehemiah led the people in a financial reform that provided for the poor and encouraged tithing to support the priests and Levites (5:2-13; 10:35-39). Like Ezra, Nehemiah urged the people to keep the Sabbath and avoid intermarrying with pagan neighbors. After a 12-year term, Nehemiah returned to Persia and the spiritual condition of Judah deteriorated. Perhaps discouraged by their lack of political power, tithing became sporadic, the Sabbath was not kept, intermarriage was common, and even the priests could not be trusted. When Nehemiah came back to Jerusalem sometime later, he had to take firm action to straighten out the situation (13:6-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Since Malachi had to deal with the same sins mentioned in Nehemiah 13 (see Mal 1:6-14; 2:14-16; 3:8-11), it is likely that the prophet ministered either during Nehemiah’s second term as governor or in the years just before his return. The reference to “the governor” in Malachi 1:8 implies that someone other than Nehemiah was in office, so it may be best to place Malachi just after 433 <span>BC<\/span>, the year Nehemiah had returned to Persia.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheology\">Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>Malachi was written to shake the people of Judah from their spiritual lethargy and to warn them that judgment was coming unless they repented. The people doubted God’s love (1:2) and justice (2:17) and did not take his commands seriously (1:6; 3:14-18). Yet God was “a great King” (1:14) with a great name that was to be feared even beyond the border of Israel (vv 5, 11). Malachi repeatedly urged both the priests and the people to revere God and give him the honor he deserved. God was Israel’s Father and Creator (2:10), but the nation showed contempt for his name (1:6; 3:5). In response to this contempt, God would send his messenger to announce the Day of the Lord (3:1). John the Baptist did call the nation to repentance, and Christ came to cleanse the temple (Jn 2:14-15) and to establish the covenant (Mal 3:1-2). Most of the work of refining and purifying will take place at the Second Coming, when Christ returns to purify his people (cf. vv 2-4) and judge the wicked (4:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Great Love for Israel (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>To introduce the book, Malachi presents a contrast between God’s love for Israel and his hatred for Edom. Yet the assertion of God’s love is greeted with a strange question: “How have you loved us?” God loved Israel by entering into a covenant with the nation at Mt Sinai, just after he had freed them from the prison of Egypt. He had chosen them as his special people (cf. Gn 12:1-3; Ex 19:5-6), whereas the descendants of Esau were not chosen (cf. Rom 9:10-13). Both Israel and Edom endured invasion and destruction, but only Israel was restored and rebuilt after the exile. The people of Edom were driven from their homeland by the Nabateans between 550 and 400 <span>BC<\/span>, and they never regained their territory. Through the judgment of Edom, God demonstrated that he is the great Ruler over the nations (Mal 1:5) and that he will not forget Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Unacceptable Sacrifices of the Priests (1:6-14)<\/h5>\n<p>Although God deserved the honor and reverence of the Israelites, both the people and the priests openly disdained his laws and regulations. Strangely, it was the priests who led the way into disobedience. Sacrifices and offerings were supposed to atone for sin, but the animals offered by the priests only served to pollute or defile the altar (1:7, 12). According to Leviticus, animals with defects were unacceptable as sacrifices, but Malachi mentions that the priests were offering to the Lord animals that were stolen and mutilated, crippled and sick (v 13; cf. v 8). To emphasize their contempt, the Lord challenged the priests to bring comparable presents to the governor. Would they dare to insult him in this fashion and face sure rejection? Rather than having the priests continue to bring unfit sacrifices to the altar, the Lord asked them to close the temple doors entirely (v 10). Going through the motions never pleased God, either in ancient times (cf. Is 1:12-13) or modern. By calling the altar and its sacrifices “contemptible” (Mal 1:7, 12), the priests were no better than the wicked sons of Eli, whose disregard of the rules for sacrifices sent them to a premature death (cf. 1 Sm 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>In sharp contrast to the attitude of the priests stands the emphasis upon God’s greatness in Malachi 1:11 and 14. God is more powerful than the gods of other nations, and even if Israel’s priests and people dishonor the Lord, eventually pure offerings will be brought to God by believing Gentiles. Perhaps these offerings refer to prayer and praise (cf. Ps 19:14; Heb 13:15; Rv 5:8), but others interpret the reference more literally (cf. Is 56:7; 60:7). Peter may be alluding to this verse in connection with the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:35).<\/p>\n<h5>The Punishment of the Priests (2:1-9)<\/h5>\n<p>One of the functions of the priests was to pronounce blessings upon the people in the name of God, but their disgraceful behavior turned the blessings into curses (Mal 2:2). Because of the priests’ sinfulness and the poor condition of the animals, their sacrifices were also worthless, and the entrails of the animals will be spread on their faces as a sign that God holds them in contempt. The disgrace heaped upon the priests differs sharply from the honor enjoyed by Aaron and his descendants. Malachi refers to a covenant of life and peace (v 5) made with Levi and more particularly with Aaron’s grandson Phinehas, who courageously took action against the Jews involved in idolatry and immorality (Nm 25:10-13). In those days the priests revered the Lord and turned many from sin (Mal 2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Another responsibility of the priests was to teach the nation the law handed down by Moses (cf. Lv 10:11). Like prophets, they were messengers of the Lord (Mal 2:7) who were supposed to walk close to the Lord, but now the priests disregarded the law and were dishonest in handing down judicial decisions (Mal 2:9; cf. Lv 19:15).<\/p>\n<h5>The Unfaithfulness of the People (2:10-16)<\/h5>\n<p>In light of the attitude of the priests, it is not surprising to discover that the people at large were unfaithful to the Lord. God had formed Israel to be his special people, but the people had broken faith with him. A major factor in their unfaithfulness was intermarriage with foreigners, a sin mentioned in Ezra 9:1-2 and Nehemiah 13:23-29. By marrying pagan women, the men of Israel invariably began to worship pagan gods and turn from the Lord. When such intermarriage occurred, it sometimes followed the divorce of an Israelite wife. In Malachi 2:14-15 God underscores the sacred commitment that he himself witnesses when two people marry. If that marriage covenant is shattered by divorce, God is deeply displeased. And it is even more tragic if divorce became an excuse to marry a more attractive or appealing foreigner.<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Messenger of the Covenant (2:17–3:5)<\/h5>\n<p>The sins of the priests and the people did not go unnoticed, even though the nation doubted that God would take action (2:17). But the third chapter opens with the announcement that the messenger of the covenant will indeed come to his temple. His way will be prepared by another messenger—a prophecy of John the Baptist, who prepared the way for the ministry of Christ (cf. Mt 11:10; Mk 1:2-3). When Christ came, he revealed his anger when he cleansed the temple (cf. Jn 2:13-17) and denounced the scribes and Pharisees (cf. 9:39), but most of his purifying and refining work awaits the Second Coming. Someday the priests and Levites will bring acceptable sacrifices, as they did in the days of Moses and Phinehas (cf. Mal 3:3-4 and 2:4-5). Verse 5 of chapter 3 broadens the scope of the judgment to include the whole nation, as sorcerers, adulterers, and those who oppress the poor are condemned.<\/p>\n<h5>The Benefits of Faithful Tithing (3:6-12)<\/h5>\n<p>Another specific weakness of postexilic Judah was the failure of the people to bring their tithes to the Lord. Encouraged by Nehemiah, the nation promised to tithe faithfully (cf. Neh 10:37-39), but apparently their good intentions were short-lived (cf. 13:10-11). According to Malachi 3:8-9, the tithes of the nation were so dismal that the people were, in effect, robbing God and were therefore under a curse. In verses 10-12 Malachi challenges the nation to bring their tithes; then God would pour out his blessing upon them. Just as the opening of the “windows in heaven” meant the end of a famine in 2 Kings 7:2, 19, so God promises that their crops will be so abundant that they will run out of storage space. The hope of “blessing” in Malachi 3:10 and 12 provides welcome relief from the curses mentioned in 1:14, 2:2, 3:9, and 4:6.<\/p>\n<h5>The Day of the Lord (3:13–4:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Faced with the challenge of Malachi 3:10-12, the people of Israel responded in two different ways. One group denied that serving God brought any benefit (3:13-15), while another segment of the nation bowed low before him with deep reverence (vv 16-18). The unbelievers argued that obeying the Lord was useless and that arrogant and evil people were the ones who prospered. In response to their charge, Malachi noted that God would remember who the righteous were in the Day of Judgment. Although all of Israel was included in the promise made to Abraham, only those who genuinely believed would be God’s treasured possession (3:17; cf. Ex 19:5), with their names written in the Book of Life (cf. Mal 3:16). As for the arrogant and evildoers, the Day of the Lord will consume them and they will have no survivors (4:1). Those who revere the Lord will enjoy spiritual and physical health under the blessing and protection of God, who is called the “sun of righteousness” (v 2). Like calves just released from confinement, the righteous will trample down the wicked and triumph over them (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>In view of the judgment associated with the Day of the Lord, Malachi urged the people to repent. To do this they needed to heed the law of Moses and take seriously the decrees and commands given at Mt Sinai (4:4; cf. 3:7). Just as Elijah called on Israel to turn back to God, so a new “Elijah” will preach repentance to a rebellious nation. When John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ (cf. Mal 3:1), he ministered “in the spirit and power of Elijah” and begged the Jews to turn from their sin and humble themselves before God (Lk 1:17). If they refused to listen, the nation faced the prospect of total destruction, the curse placed upon the people of Canaan (cf. Jos 6:17-19) and upon the nation of Edom, whose collapse was described in Malachi 1:2-5.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MALACHI, Book of Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament. Preview • Author • Background • Date • Purpose and Theology • Content Author The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah....","summary_en":"MALACHI, Book of Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament. Preview • Author • Background • Date • Purpose and Theology • Content Author The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah....","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38637,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Work","title_en":"Work","content_ro":"<h3>WORK<\/h3>\n<p>A term referring either to God’s activity or to people’s regular occupation or employment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheValueofWork\">The Value of Work<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s positive outlook on work is rooted in its teaching about God. Unlike other ancient religious writings, which regarded creation as something beneath the dignity of the Supreme Being, Scripture unashamedly describes God as a worker. Like a manual laborer, he made the universe as “the work of his fingers” (Ps 8:3). He worked with his raw material just as a potter works with the clay (Is 45:9). The intricate development of the unborn child in the womb and the vast, magnificent spread of the sky both display his supreme craftsmanship (Pss 139:13-16; 19:1). In fact, all creation bears witness to his wisdom and skill (104:24). The almighty Creator even had his rest day (Gn 2:2-3) and enjoyed job satisfaction when surveying his achievements at the end of the week (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>This vivid biblical description of a working God reaches its climax with the incarnation of Jesus. The “work” that Jesus was given to do (Jn 4:34) was, of course, the unique task of redemption. But he was also a worker in the ordinary sense. His contemporaries knew him as “a carpenter” (Mk 6:3). In NT times carpentry and joinery were muscle-building trades. So the Jesus who stormed through the temple, overturning tables and driving out the men and animals (Jn 2:14-16), was no pale weakling but a workingman whose hands had been hardened by years of toil with the ax, saw, and hammer. Hard, physical labor was not beneath the dignity of the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>If the Bible’s teaching about God enhances work’s dignity, its account of mankind’s creation gives all human labor the mark of normality. God “took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to till it and keep it” (Gn 2:15). And God’s first command, to “fill the earth and subdue it” (1:28), implied a great deal of work for both man and woman. In an important sense, people today are obeying that command of their Creator when they do their daily work, whether they acknowledge him or not. Work did not, therefore, arrive in the world as a direct result of the fall into sin (though sin did spoil working conditions, 3:17-19). Work was planned by God from the dawn of history for mankind’s good—as natural to men and women as sunset is to day (Ps 104:19-23).<\/p>\n<p>With this firm emphasis on the dignity and normality of labor, it is no surprise to find that Scripture strongly condemns idleness. “Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise” (Prv 6:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul is equally blunt: “If any one will not work, let him not eat” (2 Thes 3:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). He set a good example (Acts 20:33-35; 1 Thes 2:9). Those who refuse to work, he insists, even for spiritual reasons, earn no respect from non-Christian onlookers by depending on others to pay their bills (1 Thes 4:11-12). Wage earners, on the other hand, have the material resources of Christian service (Eph 4:28).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Vocations\">Vocations<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times the Greeks and Romans catalogued jobs according to importance or desirability. Routine manual labor, for example, was considered inferior to work involving mental activity.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish teaching contrasts strongly with this attitude. “Hate not laborious work,” taught the rabbis (Ecclus 7:15). Even the scholar had to spend some time in manual work. A few trades, like that of the tanner, were regarded as undesirable (a taboo broken very quickly by the early church—see Acts 9:43), but there is no indication in the Bible that some jobs are more worthwhile than others in God’s sight. The Lord calls craftsmen into his service (Ex 31:1-11), just as much as prophets (Is 6:8-9). So Amos was summoned from his fruit-picking to prophesy (Am 7:14-15), but with no suggestion that he was being promoted to a superior role. The important thing was not the nature of the occupation but the readiness to obey God’s call and to witness faithfully to him, whatever the job.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible has some poignant things to say about the relationship between employer and employee. The OT prophets voice the strongest criticism. God is especially concerned to see that the weak get justice (Is 1:17; Mi 6:8). So, naturally, his spokesmen declare his anger when employers exploit their laborers and cheat them of their wages (Jer 22:13; Mal 3:5; cf. Jas 5:4). A person who wants to please God must “stop oppressing those who work for [him] and treat them fairly and give them what they earn” (Is 58:6, <span>tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In Bible times, the scales were weighted heavily in favor of the employer. But Scripture is not blind to the existence of selfish, greedy employees. Every worker deserves a just wage (Lk 10:7), but those with special power must not try to increase their pay by threats and violence (3:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorkingforChrist\">Working for Christ<\/p>\n<p>God is a working God who is pleased when his people work hard and conscientiously. That conviction lies at the heart of the Bible’s teaching about Christian attitudes toward secular employment. And quite naturally, the NT extends the same positive emphasis to cover all Christian service, paid or unpaid. The world is God’s harvest field, said Jesus, waiting for Christian reapers to move in and evangelize (Mt 9:37-38). Paul used the same agricultural illustration and added another from the building trade to describe the Lord’s work of evangelism and teaching (1 Cor 3:6-15). Church leaders must work especially hard, he said (1 Thes 5:12), to stimulate <em>all<\/em> God’s people to be involved in the Lord’s work (1 Cor 15:58). All Christians should see themselves as “God’s coworkers” (3:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORK<\/h3>\n<p>A term referring either to God’s activity or to people’s regular occupation or employment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheValueofWork\">The Value of Work<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s positive outlook on work is rooted in its teaching about God. Unlike other ancient religious writings, which regarded creation as something beneath the dignity of the Supreme Being, Scripture unashamedly describes God as a worker. Like a manual laborer, he made the universe as “the work of his fingers” (Ps 8:3). He worked with his raw material just as a potter works with the clay (Is 45:9). The intricate development of the unborn child in the womb and the vast, magnificent spread of the sky both display his supreme craftsmanship (Pss 139:13-16; 19:1). In fact, all creation bears witness to his wisdom and skill (104:24). The almighty Creator even had his rest day (Gn 2:2-3) and enjoyed job satisfaction when surveying his achievements at the end of the week (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>This vivid biblical description of a working God reaches its climax with the incarnation of Jesus. The “work” that Jesus was given to do (Jn 4:34) was, of course, the unique task of redemption. But he was also a worker in the ordinary sense. His contemporaries knew him as “a carpenter” (Mk 6:3). In NT times carpentry and joinery were muscle-building trades. So the Jesus who stormed through the temple, overturning tables and driving out the men and animals (Jn 2:14-16), was no pale weakling but a workingman whose hands had been hardened by years of toil with the ax, saw, and hammer. Hard, physical labor was not beneath the dignity of the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>If the Bible’s teaching about God enhances work’s dignity, its account of mankind’s creation gives all human labor the mark of normality. God “took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to till it and keep it” (Gn 2:15). And God’s first command, to “fill the earth and subdue it” (1:28), implied a great deal of work for both man and woman. In an important sense, people today are obeying that command of their Creator when they do their daily work, whether they acknowledge him or not. Work did not, therefore, arrive in the world as a direct result of the fall into sin (though sin did spoil working conditions, 3:17-19). Work was planned by God from the dawn of history for mankind’s good—as natural to men and women as sunset is to day (Ps 104:19-23).<\/p>\n<p>With this firm emphasis on the dignity and normality of labor, it is no surprise to find that Scripture strongly condemns idleness. “Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise” (Prv 6:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul is equally blunt: “If any one will not work, let him not eat” (2 Thes 3:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). He set a good example (Acts 20:33-35; 1 Thes 2:9). Those who refuse to work, he insists, even for spiritual reasons, earn no respect from non-Christian onlookers by depending on others to pay their bills (1 Thes 4:11-12). Wage earners, on the other hand, have the material resources of Christian service (Eph 4:28).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Vocations\">Vocations<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times the Greeks and Romans catalogued jobs according to importance or desirability. Routine manual labor, for example, was considered inferior to work involving mental activity.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish teaching contrasts strongly with this attitude. “Hate not laborious work,” taught the rabbis (Ecclus 7:15). Even the scholar had to spend some time in manual work. A few trades, like that of the tanner, were regarded as undesirable (a taboo broken very quickly by the early church—see Acts 9:43), but there is no indication in the Bible that some jobs are more worthwhile than others in God’s sight. The Lord calls craftsmen into his service (Ex 31:1-11), just as much as prophets (Is 6:8-9). So Amos was summoned from his fruit-picking to prophesy (Am 7:14-15), but with no suggestion that he was being promoted to a superior role. The important thing was not the nature of the occupation but the readiness to obey God’s call and to witness faithfully to him, whatever the job.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible has some poignant things to say about the relationship between employer and employee. The OT prophets voice the strongest criticism. God is especially concerned to see that the weak get justice (Is 1:17; Mi 6:8). So, naturally, his spokesmen declare his anger when employers exploit their laborers and cheat them of their wages (Jer 22:13; Mal 3:5; cf. Jas 5:4). A person who wants to please God must “stop oppressing those who work for [him] and treat them fairly and give them what they earn” (Is 58:6, <span>tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In Bible times, the scales were weighted heavily in favor of the employer. But Scripture is not blind to the existence of selfish, greedy employees. Every worker deserves a just wage (Lk 10:7), but those with special power must not try to increase their pay by threats and violence (3:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorkingforChrist\">Working for Christ<\/p>\n<p>God is a working God who is pleased when his people work hard and conscientiously. That conviction lies at the heart of the Bible’s teaching about Christian attitudes toward secular employment. And quite naturally, the NT extends the same positive emphasis to cover all Christian service, paid or unpaid. The world is God’s harvest field, said Jesus, waiting for Christian reapers to move in and evangelize (Mt 9:37-38). Paul used the same agricultural illustration and added another from the building trade to describe the Lord’s work of evangelism and teaching (1 Cor 3:6-15). Church leaders must work especially hard, he said (1 Thes 5:12), to stimulate <em>all<\/em> God’s people to be involved in the Lord’s work (1 Cor 15:58). All Christians should see themselves as “God’s coworkers” (3:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORK A term referring either to God’s activity or to people’s regular occupation or employment. The Value of Work The Bible’s positive outlook on work is rooted in its teaching about God. Unlike other ancient religious writings, which regarded creation as something beneath the dignity of the Supreme Being, Scripture unashamedly describes God as a worker. Like a manual laborer, he made the universe as “the work of his fingers” (Ps 8:3). He worked with his raw material just as a potter works wi...","summary_en":"WORK A term referring either to God’s activity or to people’s regular occupation or employment. The Value of Work The Bible’s positive outlook on work is rooted in its teaching about God. Unlike other ancient religious writings, which regarded creation as something beneath the dignity of the Supreme Being, Scripture unashamedly describes God as a worker. Like a manual laborer, he made the universe as “the work of his fingers” (Ps 8:3). He worked with his raw material just as a potter works wi...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56348,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:14-17<\/strong> Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46). John might have placed his account of the event here to emphasize a connection with the miracle that transformed the water in purification jars into wine (John 2:1-11). The Temple and the stone jars were both instruments of purification in Judaism. Stone jars filled with water for ritual washing now contained Jesus’ wine, and a stone Temple dedicated to sacrificial purification would be replaced by Christ himself (2:19-21). Another view is that Jesus cleared the Temple at the beginning and again at the end of his ministry.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:14-17<\/strong> Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46). John might have placed his account of the event here to emphasize a connection with the miracle that transformed the water in purification jars into wine (John 2:1-11). The Temple and the stone jars were both instruments of purification in Judaism. Stone jars filled with water for ritual washing now contained Jesus’ wine, and a stone Temple dedicated to sacrificial purification would be replaced by Christ himself (2:19-21). Another view is that Jesus cleared the Temple at the beginning and again at the end of his ministry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:14-17 Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21...","summary_en":"2:14-17 Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83974,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:14-17<\/strong> Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46). John might have placed his account of the event here to emphasize a connection with the miracle that transformed the water in purification jars into wine (John 2:1-11). The Temple and the stone jars were both instruments of purification in Judaism. Stone jars filled with water for ritual washing now contained Jesus’ wine, and a stone Temple dedicated to sacrificial purification would be replaced by Christ himself (2:19-21). Another view is that Jesus cleared the Temple at the beginning and again at the end of his ministry.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:14-17<\/strong> Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46). John might have placed his account of the event here to emphasize a connection with the miracle that transformed the water in purification jars into wine (John 2:1-11). The Temple and the stone jars were both instruments of purification in Judaism. Stone jars filled with water for ritual washing now contained Jesus’ wine, and a stone Temple dedicated to sacrificial purification would be replaced by Christ himself (2:19-21). Another view is that Jesus cleared the Temple at the beginning and again at the end of his ministry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:14-17 Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21...","summary_en":"2:14-17 Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111600,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:14-17<\/strong> Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46). John might have placed his account of the event here to emphasize a connection with the miracle that transformed the water in purification jars into wine (John 2:1-11). The Temple and the stone jars were both instruments of purification in Judaism. Stone jars filled with water for ritual washing now contained Jesus’ wine, and a stone Temple dedicated to sacrificial purification would be replaced by Christ himself (2:19-21). Another view is that Jesus cleared the Temple at the beginning and again at the end of his ministry.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:14-17<\/strong> Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46). John might have placed his account of the event here to emphasize a connection with the miracle that transformed the water in purification jars into wine (John 2:1-11). The Temple and the stone jars were both instruments of purification in Judaism. Stone jars filled with water for ritual washing now contained Jesus’ wine, and a stone Temple dedicated to sacrificial purification would be replaced by Christ himself (2:19-21). Another view is that Jesus cleared the Temple at the beginning and again at the end of his ministry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:14-17 Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21...","summary_en":"2:14-17 Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139226,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:14-17<\/strong> Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46). John might have placed his account of the event here to emphasize a connection with the miracle that transformed the water in purification jars into wine (John 2:1-11). The Temple and the stone jars were both instruments of purification in Judaism. Stone jars filled with water for ritual washing now contained Jesus’ wine, and a stone Temple dedicated to sacrificial purification would be replaced by Christ himself (2:19-21). Another view is that Jesus cleared the Temple at the beginning and again at the end of his ministry.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:14-17<\/strong> Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46). John might have placed his account of the event here to emphasize a connection with the miracle that transformed the water in purification jars into wine (John 2:1-11). The Temple and the stone jars were both instruments of purification in Judaism. Stone jars filled with water for ritual washing now contained Jesus’ wine, and a stone Temple dedicated to sacrificial purification would be replaced by Christ himself (2:19-21). Another view is that Jesus cleared the Temple at the beginning and again at the end of his ministry.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:14-17 Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21...","summary_en":"2:14-17 Those who came for Passover needed to have approved sacrifices for worship. From this need grew a considerable industry for selling animals and exchanging money, but this business was being conducted in the Temple. Jesus, like a prophet, demanded that God’s house be returned to its intended uses—worship, prayer, instruction, and sacrifice. This put Jesus at odds with the Temple leadership. • The synoptic Gospels place the clearing of the Temple near the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":7000,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Coins","title_en":"Coins","content_ro":"<h3>COINS<\/h3>\n<p>Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>• Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarliestCoinsinPalestine\">Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Not until the time of Darius the Great (Darius I of Persia, 521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) did an official government-sponsored coinage become current in Palestine. Those earliest coins were oval-shaped gold darics, along with some silver coins.<\/p>\n<p>“Dram” is another term for the Persian gold daric. It is mentioned in Ezra 2:68-69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), where Zerubbabel’s caravan offered gold darics amounting to $30,000 toward rebuilding the temple. This passage is the first mention of an actual coin in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Almost at the same time that the Persian coins became current in Palestine, the widely popular silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma pieces) of Athens began to find their way to the mercantile centers of the Phoenician, Israelite, and Philistine coasts. Archaeologists have unearthed them in hoards throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. They continued to be used through the Persian period, which lasted until the Persian Empire was conquered by Alexander the Great in 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>. The coin was thick and heavy in appearance, but being of high-quality silver, it was in great demand for international commerce. Presumably Greek merchants found they could obtain the most desirable Asiatic imports in exchange for that particular form of currency.<\/p>\n<p>The silver didrachma, or half-drachma, in general use in the Greek Empire from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, continued through Roman times. After Alexander’s conquests, of course, Greek coins were used throughout the Macedonian Empire from present-day Yugoslavia to Pakistan. They were almost certainly employed for business purposes in Judea, for example.<\/p>\n<p>The shekels of the Phoenician trade centers of Tyre and Sidon, which had contributed substantially to the money supply in the Persian period, continued to be accepted in Judea even after the Alexandrian conquest. Typical of Sidon was a silver shekel portraying the battlements and walls of Sidon’s harbor, with a ship lying at anchor and two prancing lions in the foreground. A typical Tyrian shekel showed the god Baal robed and wearing a tiara. He was riding a hippocamp (winged horse with the tail of a fish) on the sea, with a fish or dolphin beneath. The reverse showed an Egyptian-type owl facing right, plus a shepherd’s crook and flail, both royal insignia in Egypt. The stater (or tetradrachma) found by the disciple Peter in a fish’s mouth and used to pay the temple tax for himself and Jesus may have been a Tyrian coin (Mt 17:27; <span>rsv<\/span> “shekel”).<\/p>\n<p>The talent, which represented a certain weight of gold or silver, was a common medium of exchange before the development of coinage. During the Maccabean period, John Hyrcanus saved the city of Jerusalem from destruction in 133 <span>BC<\/span> by paying a ransom from a 900-year-old hoard stored in David’s sepulcher. Three thousand talents of silver were sent to the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes in return for his promise to withdraw his troops. Treasure plundered from the temple by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is recorded as amounting to 17 talents. In gold talents that sum would represent the equivalent of the purchase price of about 15 large houses in a modern Western city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CoinagefromtheMaccabeestoHerodAgrippaI\">Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>Even though a native Jewish dynasty assumed the government of the Holy Land, it was many years before any indigenous Jewish coinage was minted. Presumably the inhabitants continued to use the coinage of Tyre and Egypt and of the Seleucid Empire for their commercial transactions. It was formerly supposed that silver shekels bearing images of the chalice and pomegranate cluster dated from the reign of Simon Maccabeus (142–134 <span>BC<\/span>); more recent archaeological discoveries prove that those coins date from the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>When the time came to issue the first Jewish coins, the die makers faced several problems. No mint was available, and no local people were skilled in design or die sinking. Coins current in the Near East at that time, which showed a high degree of design and craftsmanship, each bore the portrait head of a ruler or a god. For the Jews to make such coins would have meant contravening the second commandment, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). Not until well into Roman times was a coin struck in Palestine bearing a portrait head of a Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest coinage of the Hasmonean dynasty (the regnal name of the Maccabees) was the small bronze lepton (plural, lepta) of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Simon Maccabeus. The obverse showed two cornucopias with a pomegranate between them. That image symbolized the fertility that God had granted to the land. The reverse contained an inscription within a wreath, “John the high priest and the community of the Jews.” Small bronze lepta from the reign of Alexander Janneus, son of Hyrcanus I, have been found in great numbers. They were evidently much in demand for transactions at the temple, where money changers converted the gentile currency of visiting worshipers into the more acceptable Jewish money. Undoubtedly Hasmonean lepta were the coins Jesus scattered over the pavement of the Court of the Gentiles when he overturned the tables of the money changers (Mt 21:12; Jn 2:15). The lepton, or “mite,” of bronze or copper, worth <span>1<\/span>\/<span>400<\/span> of a shekel, was mentioned by Jesus on another occasion. He praised a widow’s gift of two mites to the temple treasury with the comment that the rich “contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living” (Mk 12:44, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Herod I came to power in Judea under the patronage of Mark Antony and secured the allegiance of the pro-Hasmonean Jews by marrying Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II, in 38 <span>BC<\/span>. Herod was empowered to strike his own bronze coins. Although he had a free hand to introduce innovations, Herod’s lepta followed tradition quite faithfully. The lepta carried an anchor with letters meaning “Of King Herod.” The reverse bore the double cornucopias with a pomegranate (or poppy) between them. Herod also minted a large bronze coin with what appears to be a Macedonian helmet on the obverse and a slender tripod on the reverse, along with an inscription of Herod’s name. Other designs he employed included wheat, eagles, and wreaths. He issued no silver coinage, relying instead on the available supplies of silver coins from Tyre, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Herod Archelaus assumed control. Lepta from that period bore a hanging cluster of grapes with a Greek inscription, and on the reverse a two-plumed Macedonian helmet. Grapes were an allusion to Israel as the Lord’s vine (Is 5).<\/p>\n<p>When Herod Antipas began his rule, also in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, he had no authority in Judea or Samaria. That portion of the former Jewish kingdom was placed under the control of Roman governors, or procurators, appointed directly by the emperor himself. Most familiar of the Roman procurators of Judea was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). His bronze coinage showed some bold innovations; his designs included representations of instruments used in the Roman religion such as the augur’s wand (resembling a shepherd’s crook in shape) and a ladle used in connection with broth prepared at sacrifices. The reverse bore a wreath enclosing the regnal date of <span>AD<\/span> 30–31. The two lepta put into the temple treasury (Lk 21:2) could have been lepta issued by Pilate or his predecessor. More likely, however, they were the Hasmonean lepta of Hyrcanus or Janneus, which were free of any taint of pagan Roman influence.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44), grandson of Herod the Great, continued the family tradition of ingratiating himself with the Roman overlords. Many of Herod Agrippa’s lepta have been found, showing a conical tasseled umbrella (perhaps symbolizing his royal protection of the people of Palestine) plus a Greek inscription indicating his reign. The reverse showed a bound cluster of three wheat ears and bore the regnal year as the legend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanCoinsinNewTestamentTimes\">Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman “as” came into circulation about 348 <span>BC<\/span> as a bronze coin bearing the figure of an animal. The coin was named after the Roman one-pound weight, equivalent to 12 ounces (340 grams) in our modern system. At the time of Christ’s birth, the Roman “as” minted for use in the Asiatic provinces bore the head of the emperor Augustus, with a laurel wreath on the reverse. A smaller bronze quadrans, or quarter “as,” was also minted by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Another bronze coin found in Greek and Roman currency was the assarion, first minted in the first century <span>BC<\/span> but still in use in the Christian period. One type was stamped with a winged sphinx, with an amphora on the reverse. It is still debated whether the coin described as a “farthing” in the <span>kjv<\/span> was in fact a Greek assarion or a Roman “as” or quadrans. The coin is mentioned four times in the NT, most familiarly in the question “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?” (see Mt 5:26; 10:29; Mk 12:42; Lk 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> “penny”). There is no doubt that the <span>kjv<\/span> translators decided to make the coin seem more familiar to their readers by using the name of the smallest copper coin in circulation in England at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “penny” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is the Greek form of “denarius,” the normal daily wage for a laborer in NT times. In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, for example, the master agreed to pay each man “a penny” for his day’s work (Mt 20:2, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “a denarius”). “Two pence” was the amount paid to the innkeeper by the good Samaritan (Lk 10:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because of the influence of the Roman denarius on British currency, the English penny has always been represented by the initial letter of its Roman equivalent.<\/p>\n<p>When the denarius, or “penny,” is recognized as a normal day’s wage, the astonishment of Jesus’ disciples when they were expected to find food for 5,000 people is better understood. They exclaimed that “two hundred pennyworth” of food would not feed such a crowd (Jn 6:7, <span>kjv<\/span>); that sum represented more than six months’ work.<\/p>\n<p>As might be expected, the silver and gold coinage current in Palestine during the time of Christ and for the remainder of the first century <span>AD<\/span> came primarily from Rome. The larger silver coins, however, that are referred to as tetradrachmas or staters in the NT came from Egypt, Phoenicia, or Antioch. The silver coin most frequently mentioned in the NT was the Roman denarius or the Greek drachma. Since few drachmas have been found in excavations dating from the first century, it is possible that the term was used in popular speech to refer to the denarius (plural, denarii), which was approximately the same size as the average Greek drachma. Actually, few Greek cities were permitted by their Roman overlords to continue minting drachmas.<\/p>\n<p>Caesar Augustus issued a decree for all the Roman world to be enrolled (Lk 2:1-2) in an empire-wide census just about the time that Jesus was born (6 or 5 <span>BC<\/span>). During his long reign (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14), Augustus authorized a large variety of denarii. They generally carried his likeness on their obverse with the inscription “Augustus, son of the divine one” (that is, son of Julius Caesar, who had been voted divine honors by the Roman Senate).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew 22:19 Jesus asked those trying to trick him with a question to show him a coin used to pay the government tax. They handed him a denarius bearing the portrait and inscription of Caesar (Mt 22:21). That coin could have been a denarius of Augustus, who had died some 16 years before, or of Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37), who was then on the throne. The silver denarius of Tiberius read “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.” The reverse showed the high priestess of the vestal order, flaming torch in hand, seated on her throne facing right. The title “pontif(ex) maxim(us)” referred to Tiberius rather than to the priestess.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COINS<\/h3>\n<p>Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>• Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarliestCoinsinPalestine\">Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Not until the time of Darius the Great (Darius I of Persia, 521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) did an official government-sponsored coinage become current in Palestine. Those earliest coins were oval-shaped gold darics, along with some silver coins.<\/p>\n<p>“Dram” is another term for the Persian gold daric. It is mentioned in Ezra 2:68-69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), where Zerubbabel’s caravan offered gold darics amounting to $30,000 toward rebuilding the temple. This passage is the first mention of an actual coin in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Almost at the same time that the Persian coins became current in Palestine, the widely popular silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma pieces) of Athens began to find their way to the mercantile centers of the Phoenician, Israelite, and Philistine coasts. Archaeologists have unearthed them in hoards throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. They continued to be used through the Persian period, which lasted until the Persian Empire was conquered by Alexander the Great in 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>. The coin was thick and heavy in appearance, but being of high-quality silver, it was in great demand for international commerce. Presumably Greek merchants found they could obtain the most desirable Asiatic imports in exchange for that particular form of currency.<\/p>\n<p>The silver didrachma, or half-drachma, in general use in the Greek Empire from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, continued through Roman times. After Alexander’s conquests, of course, Greek coins were used throughout the Macedonian Empire from present-day Yugoslavia to Pakistan. They were almost certainly employed for business purposes in Judea, for example.<\/p>\n<p>The shekels of the Phoenician trade centers of Tyre and Sidon, which had contributed substantially to the money supply in the Persian period, continued to be accepted in Judea even after the Alexandrian conquest. Typical of Sidon was a silver shekel portraying the battlements and walls of Sidon’s harbor, with a ship lying at anchor and two prancing lions in the foreground. A typical Tyrian shekel showed the god Baal robed and wearing a tiara. He was riding a hippocamp (winged horse with the tail of a fish) on the sea, with a fish or dolphin beneath. The reverse showed an Egyptian-type owl facing right, plus a shepherd’s crook and flail, both royal insignia in Egypt. The stater (or tetradrachma) found by the disciple Peter in a fish’s mouth and used to pay the temple tax for himself and Jesus may have been a Tyrian coin (Mt 17:27; <span>rsv<\/span> “shekel”).<\/p>\n<p>The talent, which represented a certain weight of gold or silver, was a common medium of exchange before the development of coinage. During the Maccabean period, John Hyrcanus saved the city of Jerusalem from destruction in 133 <span>BC<\/span> by paying a ransom from a 900-year-old hoard stored in David’s sepulcher. Three thousand talents of silver were sent to the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes in return for his promise to withdraw his troops. Treasure plundered from the temple by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is recorded as amounting to 17 talents. In gold talents that sum would represent the equivalent of the purchase price of about 15 large houses in a modern Western city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CoinagefromtheMaccabeestoHerodAgrippaI\">Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>Even though a native Jewish dynasty assumed the government of the Holy Land, it was many years before any indigenous Jewish coinage was minted. Presumably the inhabitants continued to use the coinage of Tyre and Egypt and of the Seleucid Empire for their commercial transactions. It was formerly supposed that silver shekels bearing images of the chalice and pomegranate cluster dated from the reign of Simon Maccabeus (142–134 <span>BC<\/span>); more recent archaeological discoveries prove that those coins date from the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>When the time came to issue the first Jewish coins, the die makers faced several problems. No mint was available, and no local people were skilled in design or die sinking. Coins current in the Near East at that time, which showed a high degree of design and craftsmanship, each bore the portrait head of a ruler or a god. For the Jews to make such coins would have meant contravening the second commandment, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). Not until well into Roman times was a coin struck in Palestine bearing a portrait head of a Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest coinage of the Hasmonean dynasty (the regnal name of the Maccabees) was the small bronze lepton (plural, lepta) of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Simon Maccabeus. The obverse showed two cornucopias with a pomegranate between them. That image symbolized the fertility that God had granted to the land. The reverse contained an inscription within a wreath, “John the high priest and the community of the Jews.” Small bronze lepta from the reign of Alexander Janneus, son of Hyrcanus I, have been found in great numbers. They were evidently much in demand for transactions at the temple, where money changers converted the gentile currency of visiting worshipers into the more acceptable Jewish money. Undoubtedly Hasmonean lepta were the coins Jesus scattered over the pavement of the Court of the Gentiles when he overturned the tables of the money changers (Mt 21:12; Jn 2:15). The lepton, or “mite,” of bronze or copper, worth <span>1<\/span>\/<span>400<\/span> of a shekel, was mentioned by Jesus on another occasion. He praised a widow’s gift of two mites to the temple treasury with the comment that the rich “contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living” (Mk 12:44, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Herod I came to power in Judea under the patronage of Mark Antony and secured the allegiance of the pro-Hasmonean Jews by marrying Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II, in 38 <span>BC<\/span>. Herod was empowered to strike his own bronze coins. Although he had a free hand to introduce innovations, Herod’s lepta followed tradition quite faithfully. The lepta carried an anchor with letters meaning “Of King Herod.” The reverse bore the double cornucopias with a pomegranate (or poppy) between them. Herod also minted a large bronze coin with what appears to be a Macedonian helmet on the obverse and a slender tripod on the reverse, along with an inscription of Herod’s name. Other designs he employed included wheat, eagles, and wreaths. He issued no silver coinage, relying instead on the available supplies of silver coins from Tyre, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Herod Archelaus assumed control. Lepta from that period bore a hanging cluster of grapes with a Greek inscription, and on the reverse a two-plumed Macedonian helmet. Grapes were an allusion to Israel as the Lord’s vine (Is 5).<\/p>\n<p>When Herod Antipas began his rule, also in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, he had no authority in Judea or Samaria. That portion of the former Jewish kingdom was placed under the control of Roman governors, or procurators, appointed directly by the emperor himself. Most familiar of the Roman procurators of Judea was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). His bronze coinage showed some bold innovations; his designs included representations of instruments used in the Roman religion such as the augur’s wand (resembling a shepherd’s crook in shape) and a ladle used in connection with broth prepared at sacrifices. The reverse bore a wreath enclosing the regnal date of <span>AD<\/span> 30–31. The two lepta put into the temple treasury (Lk 21:2) could have been lepta issued by Pilate or his predecessor. More likely, however, they were the Hasmonean lepta of Hyrcanus or Janneus, which were free of any taint of pagan Roman influence.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44), grandson of Herod the Great, continued the family tradition of ingratiating himself with the Roman overlords. Many of Herod Agrippa’s lepta have been found, showing a conical tasseled umbrella (perhaps symbolizing his royal protection of the people of Palestine) plus a Greek inscription indicating his reign. The reverse showed a bound cluster of three wheat ears and bore the regnal year as the legend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanCoinsinNewTestamentTimes\">Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman “as” came into circulation about 348 <span>BC<\/span> as a bronze coin bearing the figure of an animal. The coin was named after the Roman one-pound weight, equivalent to 12 ounces (340 grams) in our modern system. At the time of Christ’s birth, the Roman “as” minted for use in the Asiatic provinces bore the head of the emperor Augustus, with a laurel wreath on the reverse. A smaller bronze quadrans, or quarter “as,” was also minted by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Another bronze coin found in Greek and Roman currency was the assarion, first minted in the first century <span>BC<\/span> but still in use in the Christian period. One type was stamped with a winged sphinx, with an amphora on the reverse. It is still debated whether the coin described as a “farthing” in the <span>kjv<\/span> was in fact a Greek assarion or a Roman “as” or quadrans. The coin is mentioned four times in the NT, most familiarly in the question “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?” (see Mt 5:26; 10:29; Mk 12:42; Lk 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> “penny”). There is no doubt that the <span>kjv<\/span> translators decided to make the coin seem more familiar to their readers by using the name of the smallest copper coin in circulation in England at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “penny” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is the Greek form of “denarius,” the normal daily wage for a laborer in NT times. In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, for example, the master agreed to pay each man “a penny” for his day’s work (Mt 20:2, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “a denarius”). “Two pence” was the amount paid to the innkeeper by the good Samaritan (Lk 10:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because of the influence of the Roman denarius on British currency, the English penny has always been represented by the initial letter of its Roman equivalent.<\/p>\n<p>When the denarius, or “penny,” is recognized as a normal day’s wage, the astonishment of Jesus’ disciples when they were expected to find food for 5,000 people is better understood. They exclaimed that “two hundred pennyworth” of food would not feed such a crowd (Jn 6:7, <span>kjv<\/span>); that sum represented more than six months’ work.<\/p>\n<p>As might be expected, the silver and gold coinage current in Palestine during the time of Christ and for the remainder of the first century <span>AD<\/span> came primarily from Rome. The larger silver coins, however, that are referred to as tetradrachmas or staters in the NT came from Egypt, Phoenicia, or Antioch. The silver coin most frequently mentioned in the NT was the Roman denarius or the Greek drachma. Since few drachmas have been found in excavations dating from the first century, it is possible that the term was used in popular speech to refer to the denarius (plural, denarii), which was approximately the same size as the average Greek drachma. Actually, few Greek cities were permitted by their Roman overlords to continue minting drachmas.<\/p>\n<p>Caesar Augustus issued a decree for all the Roman world to be enrolled (Lk 2:1-2) in an empire-wide census just about the time that Jesus was born (6 or 5 <span>BC<\/span>). During his long reign (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14), Augustus authorized a large variety of denarii. They generally carried his likeness on their obverse with the inscription “Augustus, son of the divine one” (that is, son of Julius Caesar, who had been voted divine honors by the Roman Senate).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew 22:19 Jesus asked those trying to trick him with a question to show him a coin used to pay the government tax. They handed him a denarius bearing the portrait and inscription of Caesar (Mt 22:21). That coin could have been a denarius of Augustus, who had died some 16 years before, or of Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37), who was then on the throne. The silver denarius of Tiberius read “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.” The reverse showed the high priestess of the vestal order, flaming torch in hand, seated on her throne facing right. The title “pontif(ex) maxim(us)” referred to Tiberius rather than to the priestess.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COINS Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century BC. Preview • Earliest Coins in Palestine • Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I • Roman Coins in New Testament Times Earliest Coins in Palestine Not until the...","summary_en":"COINS Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century BC. Preview • Earliest Coins in Palestine • Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I • Roman Coins in New Testament Times Earliest Coins in Palestine Not until the...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":16916,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"House of God","title_en":"House of God","content_ro":"<h3>HOUSE OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Common phrase used in the ancient Near Eastern world for a structure used to accommodate a deity or his servants. In the OT it referred to the tabernacle (Dt 23:18; 1 Chr 6:31-32), Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 8:11-20; 12:27; Jer 20:1), national shrines, or pagan temples (Jgs 9:4; 2 Kgs 10:21).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the OT custom of referring to the temple as the “house of God” was still employed (Mt 12:4; Mk 2:26; 11:17; Lk 6:4; Jn 2:16-17), but with some significant changes. After Christ’s ascension, the church viewed itself as the house of God (1 Cor 3:9; Heb 3:6; 1 Pt 2:5; 4:17). God no longer dwelt in buildings made by human hands but in the lives of those who confess Jesus as Lord.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOUSE OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Common phrase used in the ancient Near Eastern world for a structure used to accommodate a deity or his servants. In the OT it referred to the tabernacle (Dt 23:18; 1 Chr 6:31-32), Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 8:11-20; 12:27; Jer 20:1), national shrines, or pagan temples (Jgs 9:4; 2 Kgs 10:21).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the OT custom of referring to the temple as the “house of God” was still employed (Mt 12:4; Mk 2:26; 11:17; Lk 6:4; Jn 2:16-17), but with some significant changes. After Christ’s ascension, the church viewed itself as the house of God (1 Cor 3:9; Heb 3:6; 1 Pt 2:5; 4:17). God no longer dwelt in buildings made by human hands but in the lives of those who confess Jesus as Lord.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOUSE OF GOD Common phrase used in the ancient Near Eastern world for a structure used to accommodate a deity or his servants. In the OT it referred to the tabernacle (Dt 23:18; 1 Chr 6:31-32), Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 8:11-20; 12:27; Jer 20:1), national shrines, or pagan temples (Jgs 9:4; 2 Kgs 10:21). In NT times the OT custom of referring to the temple as the “house of God” was still employed (Mt 12:4; Mk 2:26; 11:17; Lk 6:4; Jn 2:16-17), but with some significant changes. After Christ’s as...","summary_en":"HOUSE OF GOD Common phrase used in the ancient Near Eastern world for a structure used to accommodate a deity or his servants. In the OT it referred to the tabernacle (Dt 23:18; 1 Chr 6:31-32), Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 8:11-20; 12:27; Jer 20:1), national shrines, or pagan temples (Jgs 9:4; 2 Kgs 10:21). In NT times the OT custom of referring to the temple as the “house of God” was still employed (Mt 12:4; Mk 2:26; 11:17; Lk 6:4; Jn 2:16-17), but with some significant changes. After Christ’s as...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64679,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92305,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119931,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147557,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":38941,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zealot","title_en":"Zealot","content_ro":"<h3>ZEALOT<\/h3>\n<p>Term used for the second Simon among the Twelve to distinguish him from Simon Peter (Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Matthew (Mt 10:4) and Mark (Mk 3:18) use “Cananaean”—Greek and Aramaic equivalents for “zealous defender, enthusiast, one eager to acquire, fanatic” (from root words meaning “burn with zeal, or jealousy; desire eagerly”; Ex 34:14; 2 Macc 4:2). In this general sense, Christ showed zeal for God’s house. Some were “zealots” for spiritual gifts, good works, goodness, and the law, as Paul was for the tradition of the fathers and for God (Jn 2:17; Acts 21:20; 22:3; 1 Cor 14:12; Gal 1:14; Ti 2:14). So, Simon was distinguished from Peter and the others by his religious zeal.<\/p>\n<p>By the time Luke wrote, the title “Zealot” had become attached especially to a militant, anti-Roman, revolutionary faction, equally religious and political in motivation. This party may have been founded in <span>AD<\/span> 6, following the death of Herod the Great, by Judas the Galilean and Zadduk the Pharisee. The movement was rooted in Maccabean resistance to foreign rule and infiltration (1 Macc 2:15-28). Zealot opposition to Roman rule was rooted in zeal for the Torah and for God the only King. The Zealot regarded himself as an agent of divine judgment and redemption, resolutely and fearlessly contending against idolatry, apostasy, and collaboration. The Zealots thought that the Messiah would become their leader.<\/p>\n<p>As hostility between Rome and Judea sharpened, the religious motivation was channeled by nationalist feeling into a “holy war.” Whereas the Maccabees had been forced to take arms in self-defense, the Zealots became increasingly militaristic. Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.1-6; <em>War<\/em> 4.3.9), with some prejudice, calls them brigands and robbers. Their Latin name was <em>sicarii,<\/em> assassins, but supporters would call them patriotic guerrillas. They reached preeminence in the revolt against Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70). Their last refuge and stronghold, at Masada, was overcome in <span>AD<\/span> 73, when the surviving 960 committed suicide.<\/p>\n<p>Simon probably was, or had been, a member of this movement’s earlier phase, around <span>AD<\/span> 30. It is less probable that Judas Iscariot (possibly Sicarius) and the “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17) were. Judas the Galilean (Acts 5:37-38), and even Paul (21:38), were considered Zealots.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> First Jewish Revolt; Judaism.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ZEALOT<\/h3>\n<p>Term used for the second Simon among the Twelve to distinguish him from Simon Peter (Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Matthew (Mt 10:4) and Mark (Mk 3:18) use “Cananaean”—Greek and Aramaic equivalents for “zealous defender, enthusiast, one eager to acquire, fanatic” (from root words meaning “burn with zeal, or jealousy; desire eagerly”; Ex 34:14; 2 Macc 4:2). In this general sense, Christ showed zeal for God’s house. Some were “zealots” for spiritual gifts, good works, goodness, and the law, as Paul was for the tradition of the fathers and for God (Jn 2:17; Acts 21:20; 22:3; 1 Cor 14:12; Gal 1:14; Ti 2:14). So, Simon was distinguished from Peter and the others by his religious zeal.<\/p>\n<p>By the time Luke wrote, the title “Zealot” had become attached especially to a militant, anti-Roman, revolutionary faction, equally religious and political in motivation. This party may have been founded in <span>AD<\/span> 6, following the death of Herod the Great, by Judas the Galilean and Zadduk the Pharisee. The movement was rooted in Maccabean resistance to foreign rule and infiltration (1 Macc 2:15-28). Zealot opposition to Roman rule was rooted in zeal for the Torah and for God the only King. The Zealot regarded himself as an agent of divine judgment and redemption, resolutely and fearlessly contending against idolatry, apostasy, and collaboration. The Zealots thought that the Messiah would become their leader.<\/p>\n<p>As hostility between Rome and Judea sharpened, the religious motivation was channeled by nationalist feeling into a “holy war.” Whereas the Maccabees had been forced to take arms in self-defense, the Zealots became increasingly militaristic. Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.1-6; <em>War<\/em> 4.3.9), with some prejudice, calls them brigands and robbers. Their Latin name was <em>sicarii,<\/em> assassins, but supporters would call them patriotic guerrillas. They reached preeminence in the revolt against Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70). Their last refuge and stronghold, at Masada, was overcome in <span>AD<\/span> 73, when the surviving 960 committed suicide.<\/p>\n<p>Simon probably was, or had been, a member of this movement’s earlier phase, around <span>AD<\/span> 30. It is less probable that Judas Iscariot (possibly Sicarius) and the “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17) were. Judas the Galilean (Acts 5:37-38), and even Paul (21:38), were considered Zealots.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> First Jewish Revolt; Judaism.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ZEALOT Term used for the second Simon among the Twelve to distinguish him from Simon Peter (Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Matthew (Mt 10:4) and Mark (Mk 3:18) use “Cananaean”—Greek and Aramaic equivalents for “zealous defender, enthusiast, one eager to acquire, fanatic” (from root words meaning “burn with zeal, or jealousy; desire eagerly”; Ex 34:14; 2 Macc 4:2). In this general sense, Christ showed zeal for God’s house. Some were “zealots” for spiritual gifts, good works, goodness, and the law, as Pa...","summary_en":"ZEALOT Term used for the second Simon among the Twelve to distinguish him from Simon Peter (Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Matthew (Mt 10:4) and Mark (Mk 3:18) use “Cananaean”—Greek and Aramaic equivalents for “zealous defender, enthusiast, one eager to acquire, fanatic” (from root words meaning “burn with zeal, or jealousy; desire eagerly”; Ex 34:14; 2 Macc 4:2). In this general sense, Christ showed zeal for God’s house. Some were “zealots” for spiritual gifts, good works, goodness, and the law, as Pa...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":42456,"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":70082,"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":97708,"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":125334,"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":65835,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67214,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93461,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94840,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121087,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122466,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148713,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150092,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":42562,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Stephen","title_en":"Stephen","content_ro":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","summary_en":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70188,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Stephen","title_en":"Stephen","content_ro":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","summary_en":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97814,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Stephen","title_en":"Stephen","content_ro":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","summary_en":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125440,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Stephen","title_en":"Stephen","content_ro":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","summary_en":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5401,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Body of Christ","title_en":"Body of Christ","content_ro":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","summary_en":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11342,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Exaltation","title_en":"of Christ*, Exaltation","content_ro":"<h3>EXALTATION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement.<\/p>\n<p>During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28; Jn 3:14; 6:51; 10:11; etc.) but also that he would thereafter be exalted by the power of the Father to heavenly dominion and glory (Lk 24:26; Jn 17:5). This humiliation-exaltation pattern was plainly indicated by Jesus on the occasion of his encounter with a delegation of proselytes who sought to meet with the Lord (Jn 12:20-36). Jesus far exceeded the expectations of these Greeks by declaring that fellowship with his Father would be extended to the Gentiles in consequence of his imminent passion and resurrection. By affirming, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified” (Jn 12:23, <span>rsv<\/span>), Jesus indicated that he would be endowed with honor and splendor at his exaltation to the presence of the Father in heaven. Jesus’ teaching in respect to his exaltation to heaven provided the foundation for the church’s more explicit teaching on the subject.<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection, the initial event in the exaltation of Jesus, is one of the central affirmations of NT teaching (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:4). From apostolic times Christians have consistently affirmed that at a particular moment in time and in a given place its founder literally passed from a state of death to a state of endless life. The absolute uniqueness of Christ’s exaltation via bodily resurrection from the dead sets Christianity in a class by itself among the religions of the world. A reading of the NT plainly indicates that Jesus openly predicted that death was unable to defeat him. To the skeptical Jews who demanded from Jesus a sign of the authority by which he purged the temple, the Lord answered: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). After Peter’s crucial confession of Christ’s divine sonship at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus gave to his followers a more detailed account of the divine plan whereby he would be raised from the dead on the third day (Mt 16:21). To the disciples who assembled in Galilee shortly after his transfiguration, Jesus spoke plainly of his forthcoming exaltation: “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day” (17:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT, the apostolic teaching about Christ’s death is almost always accompanied by an emphasis upon the certainty of his physical resurrection after three days.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the NT writers were careful to spell out the profound theological significance of Christ’s exaltation in resurrection: (1) it demonstrates Christ’s certain power over death and the grave (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 15:54-56); (2) it confirms the validity of Christ’s teachings, particularly his claims to divine Sonship (Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4); (3) it represents God’s ultimate vindication of his obedient, suffering servant (Phil 2:8-9); (4) it is the means of the justification (Rom 4:25) and regeneration (1 Pt 1:3) of the believer; and (5) it is the guarantee of the future resurrection of the Christian (Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 15:22-24). The effective cause of Christ’s resurrection is declared to be, on one hand, God (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:32; Eph 1:19-20) and, on the other hand, our Lord himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension represents the second phase of the exaltation of Christ. According to the two NT historical accounts (Lk 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11), 40 days after his death Jesus left his disciples for the last time and ascended into heaven. Jesus, who several times in John’s Gospel specifically refers to his ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 14:12; 20:17), regarded the place to which he would depart as an actual locality in the heavenly realm (14:2). In his reflection upon this second stage of the exaltation intimated by Psalm 68:18, the apostle Paul associates the ascension with Christ’s triumph over his foes and the bestowal of spiritual gifts to the church (Eph 4:8). The victor triumphantly returned to his Father’s throne in order to bless his people. In what may be part of an early Christian hymn, Paul explicates what he regards as the supreme “mystery” of the Christian faith, namely, that Christ Jesus who “was manifested in the flesh” was at the close of his life “taken up into glory” (1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Alone among the writings of the NT, the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s ascension with his high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He who steadfastly withstood every earthly trial, having “passed through the heavens,” is fully able to empathize with his people and impart grace to the tempted and distraught (Heb 4:14ff.). Employing the symbolism of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary, the writer conceptualizes the Ascension as the event whereby Christ enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain (6:19), bringing with him his own blood (9:12), to the end that he might appear in the presence of God on our behalf (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT thus attributes considerable theological significance to this phase of Christ’s exaltation. By virtue of his exaltation to the Father, Christ (1) demonstrated his defeat of every earthly enemy (Eph 4:8); (2) sent the promised Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7; Acts 2:33), which awaited his glorification (Jn 7:39); and (3) formally undertook his heavenly priestly ministry (Heb 6:20).<\/p>\n<p>The third stage of Christ’s exaltation is his heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father. Following his passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly realm, Christ is represented in Scripture as having taken his seat at the Father’s right hand. The biblical phrase “right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56), which has been preserved in many later Christian creeds and confessions, is an anthropomorphism that figuratively describes Christ’s universal dominion, authority, and power in the presence of the Father. This aspect of Christ’s exaltation represents the fulfillment of his prayer recorded in John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory I had with you before the world was made.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the description of God seated on the throne of the universe is a sign of his sovereignty (1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 99:1), majesty (Is 6:1-4) and holiness (Ps 47:8). That one should be invited to take a seat on the right hand of the sovereign in Eastern cultures was a token of extraordinary honor and authority (1 Kgs 2:19). The fact that the exalted Christ would be accorded this particular privilege was anticipated in the Scriptures of the OT (see Ps 8:5, quoted in Heb 2:8; and see Ps 110:1).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Hebrews, which shows unusual interest in the doctrine of Christ’s exaltation, represents Christ’s heavenly enthronement both as the sequel to his completed earthly sacrifice and as the commencement of his High Priestly ministration in the sanctuary on high. Affirming the superiority of Christ as High Priest of the new covenant, Hebrews 8:1-2 portrays Christ as seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the heavenlies. Christ’s enthronement affirms not only the finality of his earthly work of self-sacrifice but also his newly acquired status as mediator of the new and better covenant. Hebrews 10:11-18 pointedly contrasts the ineffectual sacrifices of the legal priests who <em>stand<\/em> in the performance of their ritual sacrifices with the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now <em>seated<\/em> at the right hand of God as intercessor for the saints.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EXALTATION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement.<\/p>\n<p>During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28; Jn 3:14; 6:51; 10:11; etc.) but also that he would thereafter be exalted by the power of the Father to heavenly dominion and glory (Lk 24:26; Jn 17:5). This humiliation-exaltation pattern was plainly indicated by Jesus on the occasion of his encounter with a delegation of proselytes who sought to meet with the Lord (Jn 12:20-36). Jesus far exceeded the expectations of these Greeks by declaring that fellowship with his Father would be extended to the Gentiles in consequence of his imminent passion and resurrection. By affirming, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified” (Jn 12:23, <span>rsv<\/span>), Jesus indicated that he would be endowed with honor and splendor at his exaltation to the presence of the Father in heaven. Jesus’ teaching in respect to his exaltation to heaven provided the foundation for the church’s more explicit teaching on the subject.<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection, the initial event in the exaltation of Jesus, is one of the central affirmations of NT teaching (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:4). From apostolic times Christians have consistently affirmed that at a particular moment in time and in a given place its founder literally passed from a state of death to a state of endless life. The absolute uniqueness of Christ’s exaltation via bodily resurrection from the dead sets Christianity in a class by itself among the religions of the world. A reading of the NT plainly indicates that Jesus openly predicted that death was unable to defeat him. To the skeptical Jews who demanded from Jesus a sign of the authority by which he purged the temple, the Lord answered: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). After Peter’s crucial confession of Christ’s divine sonship at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus gave to his followers a more detailed account of the divine plan whereby he would be raised from the dead on the third day (Mt 16:21). To the disciples who assembled in Galilee shortly after his transfiguration, Jesus spoke plainly of his forthcoming exaltation: “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day” (17:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT, the apostolic teaching about Christ’s death is almost always accompanied by an emphasis upon the certainty of his physical resurrection after three days.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the NT writers were careful to spell out the profound theological significance of Christ’s exaltation in resurrection: (1) it demonstrates Christ’s certain power over death and the grave (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 15:54-56); (2) it confirms the validity of Christ’s teachings, particularly his claims to divine Sonship (Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4); (3) it represents God’s ultimate vindication of his obedient, suffering servant (Phil 2:8-9); (4) it is the means of the justification (Rom 4:25) and regeneration (1 Pt 1:3) of the believer; and (5) it is the guarantee of the future resurrection of the Christian (Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 15:22-24). The effective cause of Christ’s resurrection is declared to be, on one hand, God (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:32; Eph 1:19-20) and, on the other hand, our Lord himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension represents the second phase of the exaltation of Christ. According to the two NT historical accounts (Lk 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11), 40 days after his death Jesus left his disciples for the last time and ascended into heaven. Jesus, who several times in John’s Gospel specifically refers to his ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 14:12; 20:17), regarded the place to which he would depart as an actual locality in the heavenly realm (14:2). In his reflection upon this second stage of the exaltation intimated by Psalm 68:18, the apostle Paul associates the ascension with Christ’s triumph over his foes and the bestowal of spiritual gifts to the church (Eph 4:8). The victor triumphantly returned to his Father’s throne in order to bless his people. In what may be part of an early Christian hymn, Paul explicates what he regards as the supreme “mystery” of the Christian faith, namely, that Christ Jesus who “was manifested in the flesh” was at the close of his life “taken up into glory” (1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Alone among the writings of the NT, the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s ascension with his high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He who steadfastly withstood every earthly trial, having “passed through the heavens,” is fully able to empathize with his people and impart grace to the tempted and distraught (Heb 4:14ff.). Employing the symbolism of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary, the writer conceptualizes the Ascension as the event whereby Christ enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain (6:19), bringing with him his own blood (9:12), to the end that he might appear in the presence of God on our behalf (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT thus attributes considerable theological significance to this phase of Christ’s exaltation. By virtue of his exaltation to the Father, Christ (1) demonstrated his defeat of every earthly enemy (Eph 4:8); (2) sent the promised Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7; Acts 2:33), which awaited his glorification (Jn 7:39); and (3) formally undertook his heavenly priestly ministry (Heb 6:20).<\/p>\n<p>The third stage of Christ’s exaltation is his heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father. Following his passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly realm, Christ is represented in Scripture as having taken his seat at the Father’s right hand. The biblical phrase “right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56), which has been preserved in many later Christian creeds and confessions, is an anthropomorphism that figuratively describes Christ’s universal dominion, authority, and power in the presence of the Father. This aspect of Christ’s exaltation represents the fulfillment of his prayer recorded in John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory I had with you before the world was made.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the description of God seated on the throne of the universe is a sign of his sovereignty (1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 99:1), majesty (Is 6:1-4) and holiness (Ps 47:8). That one should be invited to take a seat on the right hand of the sovereign in Eastern cultures was a token of extraordinary honor and authority (1 Kgs 2:19). The fact that the exalted Christ would be accorded this particular privilege was anticipated in the Scriptures of the OT (see Ps 8:5, quoted in Heb 2:8; and see Ps 110:1).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Hebrews, which shows unusual interest in the doctrine of Christ’s exaltation, represents Christ’s heavenly enthronement both as the sequel to his completed earthly sacrifice and as the commencement of his High Priestly ministration in the sanctuary on high. Affirming the superiority of Christ as High Priest of the new covenant, Hebrews 8:1-2 portrays Christ as seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the heavenlies. Christ’s enthronement affirms not only the finality of his earthly work of self-sacrifice but also his newly acquired status as mediator of the new and better covenant. Hebrews 10:11-18 pointedly contrasts the ineffectual sacrifices of the legal priests who <em>stand<\/em> in the performance of their ritual sacrifices with the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now <em>seated<\/em> at the right hand of God as intercessor for the saints.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EXALTATION OF CHRIST* The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement. During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28...","summary_en":"EXALTATION OF CHRIST* The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement. During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31619,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophecy","title_en":"Prophecy","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","summary_en":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38728,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Worship","title_en":"Worship","content_ro":"<h3>WORSHIP<\/h3>\n<p>Expression of reverence and adoration of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorshipintheOldTestament\">Worship in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 <span>BC<\/span>) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted more than three centuries until its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. When the Jews returned from exile, they built a new temple, which was later renovated and enlarged by Herod the Great. Though all the temple buildings were destroyed by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the foundations remained. Jews still pray by the Western Wall (called the Wailing Wall).<\/p>\n<p>If the form of worship changed with times and situations, its heart and center did not. God revealed himself to Abraham, promising that his children would inherit the land of Canaan. Abraham demonstrated his faith through prayer and sacrifice. Throughout the biblical period listening to God’s Word, prayer, and sacrifice constituted the essence of worship. The promises to Abraham were constantly recalled as the basis of Israel’s existence as a nation and its right to the land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>From time to time every family visited the temple in Jerusalem. Eight days after a baby boy was born, he was circumcised to mark his membership in Israel. Then, a month or two later, the baby’s mother went to the temple to offer sacrifice (Lv 12; cf. Lk 2:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>Animals were sacrificed in the lambing and calving season. The first lamb or calf born to every ewe or cow was presented in sacrifice (Ex 22:30). Similarly, at the beginning of the harvest season, a basket of the first fruits was offered, and at the end, a tenth of all the harvest, the tithe, was given to the priests as God’s representatives (Nm 18:21-32). Deuteronomy 26:5-15 gives a typical prayer for use on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes a person would decide to offer a sacrifice for more personal reasons. In a crisis, vows could be made and sealed with a sacrifice (Gn 28:18-22; 1 Sm 1:10-11). Then when the prayer was answered, a second sacrifice was customarily offered (Gn 35:3, 14; 1 Sm 1:24-25). Serious sin or serious sickness were also occasions for sacrifice (Lv 4–5, 13–15).<\/p>\n<p>The worshiper brought the animal into the temple court. Standing before the priest, he placed one hand on its head, thereby identifying himself with the animal, and confessed his sin or explained the reason for offering the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and cut it up for the priest to burn on the great bronze altar. Some sacrifices (burnt offerings) involved the whole animal being burnt on the altar. In others, some of the meat was set aside for the priests, while the rest was shared by the worshiper and his family. But in every case the worshiper killed the animal from his own flock with his own hands. These sacrifices expressed in a vivid and tangible way the cost of sin and the worshiper’s responsibility. As the worshiper killed the animal, he recalled that sin would have caused his own death, had God not provided an escape through animal sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>Three times a year all adult men went to the temple to celebrate the national festivals (Ex 23:17; Dt 16:16): Passover (held in April), the Feast of Weeks (held in May), and the Feast of Booths (in October). When possible, the whole family accompanied the men. But if they lived a long way from Jerusalem, they would go up for only one of the festivals (1 Sm 1:3; Lk 2:41).<\/p>\n<p>These festivals were tremendous occasions. Hundreds of thousands of people converged on Jerusalem. They would stay with relatives or camp in tents outside the city. The temple courts would be thronged with worshipers. The temple choirs sang psalms appropriate for the festival, while the priests and Levites offered hundreds (at Passover, thousands) of animals in sacrifice. Groups of worshipers carried away with emotion would break forth into dancing. Those of more sober temperament were content to join in the singing or simply pray quietly.<\/p>\n<p>The major festivals were joyful occasions, for they celebrated the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. At Passover each family ate roasted lamb and bitter herbs to reenact the last meal their forefathers ate before leaving Egypt (Ex 12). At the Feast of Booths, they built shelters of branches and lived in them for a week, as a reminder that the Israelites camped in tents during the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness (Lv 23:39-43). These great festivals served as reminders of how God had delivered them from slavery in Egypt and had given them the land of Canaan as he had promised to Abraham.<\/p>\n<p>Each of these three festivals lasted a week, but there was one day in the year that was totally different, the Day of Atonement, when everyone fasted and mourned for their sins. On this day the high priest confessed the nation’s sins as he pressed his hand on the head of a goat. Then the goat was led away into the wilderness, symbolizing the removal of sin from the people (Lv 16).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after the destruction of the first temple, synagogues developed for public worship. The services were more like modern church worship, consisting exclusively of prayer, Bible reading, and preaching. There were no sacrifices made in the synagogues. When the second temple was destroyed in <span>AD<\/span> 70, synagogues became the only places where Jews could worship in public. Then there were no more sacrifices at all. The NT pictures this as fitting, for Jesus was the true Lamb of God (Jn 1:29); because of his death, there is no need for further animal sacrifice (Heb 10:11-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorshipintheNewTestament\">Worship in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Jews had become far too dependent on a physical place, the temple, for their worship. When Jesus arrived on the scene, he proclaimed that he himself was the temple of God; in resurrection, he would provide the spiritual dwelling where God the Spirit and people, in spirit, could have spiritual communion (see Mt 12:6; Jn 2:19-22). In other words, worship would no longer be in a place but in a person—through Jesus Christ and his Spirit the worshipers could come directly to God (see Jn 14:6; Heb 10:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>This shift in worship—from physical to spiritual—is the theme of John 4, a chapter that recounts Jesus’ visit to the Samaritans. After Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman, she acknowledged that he must be a prophet, and then she launched into a discussion concerning the religious debate between the Jews and the Samaritans over which place of worship was the right one—Jerusalem or Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans had set up a place for worship on Mt Gerizim in accordance with Deuteronomy 11:26-29 and 27:1-8, while the Jews had followed David and Solomon in making Jerusalem the center of Jewish worship. The Scriptures affirmed Jerusalem as the true center for worship (Dt 12:5; 2 Chr 6:6; 7:12; Ps 78:67-68). But Jesus told her that a new age had come in which the issue no longer concerned a physical site. God the Father would no longer be worshiped in either place. A new age had come in which the true worshipers (Jew, Samaritan, or Gentile) must worship the Father in spirit and in truth.<\/p>\n<p>“In spirit” corresponds to Jerusalem, and “in truth” corresponds to the Samaritans’ unknowledgeable ideas of worship, God, etc. Formerly, God was worshiped in Jerusalem, but now the true Jerusalem would be in a person’s spirit. Indeed, the church is called “the habitation of God in spirit” (Eph 2:22). True worship required a people to contact God, the Spirit, in their spirit, as well as a people who knew the truth. New Testament worship must be in spirit and in truth. Since “God is Spirit,” he must be worshiped in spirit. Human beings possess a human spirit, the nature of which corresponds to God’s nature, which is spirit. Therefore, people can have fellowship with God and worship God in the same sphere that God exists in.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, John 4 anticipates Revelation 21 and 22, where God provides the rivers of the water of life to all the believers and where the Lamb and God are the temple in the New Jerusalem. The believers receive life from God and they worship in God. There is a profound, even mystical connection between drinking of the Spirit and worshiping God in the Spirit (see 1 Cor 12:13). This is also described in Ezekiel 47, which pictures the river flowing from God’s temple as a symbol of God’s never-ending supply. In John 4, Jesus provides the living waters to all who receive the gift of God, and he directs people to a new temple, a spiritual one, where God is worshiped in spirit.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORSHIP<\/h3>\n<p>Expression of reverence and adoration of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorshipintheOldTestament\">Worship in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 <span>BC<\/span>) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted more than three centuries until its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. When the Jews returned from exile, they built a new temple, which was later renovated and enlarged by Herod the Great. Though all the temple buildings were destroyed by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the foundations remained. Jews still pray by the Western Wall (called the Wailing Wall).<\/p>\n<p>If the form of worship changed with times and situations, its heart and center did not. God revealed himself to Abraham, promising that his children would inherit the land of Canaan. Abraham demonstrated his faith through prayer and sacrifice. Throughout the biblical period listening to God’s Word, prayer, and sacrifice constituted the essence of worship. The promises to Abraham were constantly recalled as the basis of Israel’s existence as a nation and its right to the land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>From time to time every family visited the temple in Jerusalem. Eight days after a baby boy was born, he was circumcised to mark his membership in Israel. Then, a month or two later, the baby’s mother went to the temple to offer sacrifice (Lv 12; cf. Lk 2:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>Animals were sacrificed in the lambing and calving season. The first lamb or calf born to every ewe or cow was presented in sacrifice (Ex 22:30). Similarly, at the beginning of the harvest season, a basket of the first fruits was offered, and at the end, a tenth of all the harvest, the tithe, was given to the priests as God’s representatives (Nm 18:21-32). Deuteronomy 26:5-15 gives a typical prayer for use on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes a person would decide to offer a sacrifice for more personal reasons. In a crisis, vows could be made and sealed with a sacrifice (Gn 28:18-22; 1 Sm 1:10-11). Then when the prayer was answered, a second sacrifice was customarily offered (Gn 35:3, 14; 1 Sm 1:24-25). Serious sin or serious sickness were also occasions for sacrifice (Lv 4–5, 13–15).<\/p>\n<p>The worshiper brought the animal into the temple court. Standing before the priest, he placed one hand on its head, thereby identifying himself with the animal, and confessed his sin or explained the reason for offering the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and cut it up for the priest to burn on the great bronze altar. Some sacrifices (burnt offerings) involved the whole animal being burnt on the altar. In others, some of the meat was set aside for the priests, while the rest was shared by the worshiper and his family. But in every case the worshiper killed the animal from his own flock with his own hands. These sacrifices expressed in a vivid and tangible way the cost of sin and the worshiper’s responsibility. As the worshiper killed the animal, he recalled that sin would have caused his own death, had God not provided an escape through animal sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>Three times a year all adult men went to the temple to celebrate the national festivals (Ex 23:17; Dt 16:16): Passover (held in April), the Feast of Weeks (held in May), and the Feast of Booths (in October). When possible, the whole family accompanied the men. But if they lived a long way from Jerusalem, they would go up for only one of the festivals (1 Sm 1:3; Lk 2:41).<\/p>\n<p>These festivals were tremendous occasions. Hundreds of thousands of people converged on Jerusalem. They would stay with relatives or camp in tents outside the city. The temple courts would be thronged with worshipers. The temple choirs sang psalms appropriate for the festival, while the priests and Levites offered hundreds (at Passover, thousands) of animals in sacrifice. Groups of worshipers carried away with emotion would break forth into dancing. Those of more sober temperament were content to join in the singing or simply pray quietly.<\/p>\n<p>The major festivals were joyful occasions, for they celebrated the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. At Passover each family ate roasted lamb and bitter herbs to reenact the last meal their forefathers ate before leaving Egypt (Ex 12). At the Feast of Booths, they built shelters of branches and lived in them for a week, as a reminder that the Israelites camped in tents during the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness (Lv 23:39-43). These great festivals served as reminders of how God had delivered them from slavery in Egypt and had given them the land of Canaan as he had promised to Abraham.<\/p>\n<p>Each of these three festivals lasted a week, but there was one day in the year that was totally different, the Day of Atonement, when everyone fasted and mourned for their sins. On this day the high priest confessed the nation’s sins as he pressed his hand on the head of a goat. Then the goat was led away into the wilderness, symbolizing the removal of sin from the people (Lv 16).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after the destruction of the first temple, synagogues developed for public worship. The services were more like modern church worship, consisting exclusively of prayer, Bible reading, and preaching. There were no sacrifices made in the synagogues. When the second temple was destroyed in <span>AD<\/span> 70, synagogues became the only places where Jews could worship in public. Then there were no more sacrifices at all. The NT pictures this as fitting, for Jesus was the true Lamb of God (Jn 1:29); because of his death, there is no need for further animal sacrifice (Heb 10:11-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorshipintheNewTestament\">Worship in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Jews had become far too dependent on a physical place, the temple, for their worship. When Jesus arrived on the scene, he proclaimed that he himself was the temple of God; in resurrection, he would provide the spiritual dwelling where God the Spirit and people, in spirit, could have spiritual communion (see Mt 12:6; Jn 2:19-22). In other words, worship would no longer be in a place but in a person—through Jesus Christ and his Spirit the worshipers could come directly to God (see Jn 14:6; Heb 10:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>This shift in worship—from physical to spiritual—is the theme of John 4, a chapter that recounts Jesus’ visit to the Samaritans. After Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman, she acknowledged that he must be a prophet, and then she launched into a discussion concerning the religious debate between the Jews and the Samaritans over which place of worship was the right one—Jerusalem or Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans had set up a place for worship on Mt Gerizim in accordance with Deuteronomy 11:26-29 and 27:1-8, while the Jews had followed David and Solomon in making Jerusalem the center of Jewish worship. The Scriptures affirmed Jerusalem as the true center for worship (Dt 12:5; 2 Chr 6:6; 7:12; Ps 78:67-68). But Jesus told her that a new age had come in which the issue no longer concerned a physical site. God the Father would no longer be worshiped in either place. A new age had come in which the true worshipers (Jew, Samaritan, or Gentile) must worship the Father in spirit and in truth.<\/p>\n<p>“In spirit” corresponds to Jerusalem, and “in truth” corresponds to the Samaritans’ unknowledgeable ideas of worship, God, etc. Formerly, God was worshiped in Jerusalem, but now the true Jerusalem would be in a person’s spirit. Indeed, the church is called “the habitation of God in spirit” (Eph 2:22). True worship required a people to contact God, the Spirit, in their spirit, as well as a people who knew the truth. New Testament worship must be in spirit and in truth. Since “God is Spirit,” he must be worshiped in spirit. Human beings possess a human spirit, the nature of which corresponds to God’s nature, which is spirit. Therefore, people can have fellowship with God and worship God in the same sphere that God exists in.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, John 4 anticipates Revelation 21 and 22, where God provides the rivers of the water of life to all the believers and where the Lamb and God are the temple in the New Jerusalem. The believers receive life from God and they worship in God. There is a profound, even mystical connection between drinking of the Spirit and worshiping God in the Spirit (see 1 Cor 12:13). This is also described in Ezekiel 47, which pictures the river flowing from God’s temple as a symbol of God’s never-ending supply. In John 4, Jesus provides the living waters to all who receive the gift of God, and he directs people to a new temple, a spiritual one, where God is worshiped in spirit.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORSHIP Expression of reverence and adoration of God. Worship in the Old Testament The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted ...","summary_en":"WORSHIP Expression of reverence and adoration of God. Worship in the Old Testament The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted ...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56349,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:19-21<\/strong> <em>Destroy this temple:<\/em> Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and work on it continued until <span>AD<\/span> 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of <em>his own body<\/em> as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in <em>three days<\/em> through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later, at his trial, Jesus’ symbolic reference to destroying the Temple was used as evidence of blasphemy (Mark 14:58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:19-21<\/strong> <em>Destroy this temple:<\/em> Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and work on it continued until <span>AD<\/span> 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of <em>his own body<\/em> as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in <em>three days<\/em> through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later, at his trial, Jesus’ symbolic reference to destroying the Temple was used as evidence of blasphemy (Mark 14:58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:19-21 Destroy this temple: Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 BC, and work on it continued until AD 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of his own body as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in three days through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later...","summary_en":"2:19-21 Destroy this temple: Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 BC, and work on it continued until AD 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of his own body as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in three days through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83975,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:19-21<\/strong> <em>Destroy this temple:<\/em> Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and work on it continued until <span>AD<\/span> 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of <em>his own body<\/em> as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in <em>three days<\/em> through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later, at his trial, Jesus’ symbolic reference to destroying the Temple was used as evidence of blasphemy (Mark 14:58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:19-21<\/strong> <em>Destroy this temple:<\/em> Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and work on it continued until <span>AD<\/span> 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of <em>his own body<\/em> as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in <em>three days<\/em> through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later, at his trial, Jesus’ symbolic reference to destroying the Temple was used as evidence of blasphemy (Mark 14:58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:19-21 Destroy this temple: Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 BC, and work on it continued until AD 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of his own body as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in three days through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later...","summary_en":"2:19-21 Destroy this temple: Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 BC, and work on it continued until AD 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of his own body as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in three days through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111601,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:19-21<\/strong> <em>Destroy this temple:<\/em> Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and work on it continued until <span>AD<\/span> 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of <em>his own body<\/em> as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in <em>three days<\/em> through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later, at his trial, Jesus’ symbolic reference to destroying the Temple was used as evidence of blasphemy (Mark 14:58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:19-21<\/strong> <em>Destroy this temple:<\/em> Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and work on it continued until <span>AD<\/span> 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of <em>his own body<\/em> as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in <em>three days<\/em> through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later, at his trial, Jesus’ symbolic reference to destroying the Temple was used as evidence of blasphemy (Mark 14:58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:19-21 Destroy this temple: Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 BC, and work on it continued until AD 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of his own body as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in three days through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later...","summary_en":"2:19-21 Destroy this temple: Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 BC, and work on it continued until AD 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of his own body as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in three days through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139227,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:19-21<\/strong> <em>Destroy this temple:<\/em> Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and work on it continued until <span>AD<\/span> 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of <em>his own body<\/em> as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in <em>three days<\/em> through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later, at his trial, Jesus’ symbolic reference to destroying the Temple was used as evidence of blasphemy (Mark 14:58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>2:19-21<\/strong> <em>Destroy this temple:<\/em> Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and work on it continued until <span>AD<\/span> 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of <em>his own body<\/em> as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in <em>three days<\/em> through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later, at his trial, Jesus’ symbolic reference to destroying the Temple was used as evidence of blasphemy (Mark 14:58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:19-21 Destroy this temple: Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 BC, and work on it continued until AD 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of his own body as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in three days through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later...","summary_en":"2:19-21 Destroy this temple: Herod the Great began reconstructing the Temple’s magnificent structure in 20 BC, and work on it continued until AD 64. This explains why Jesus’ audience was amazed when he claimed he could destroy and rebuild it in a few days. However, Jesus spoke figuratively of his own body as the temple where God was present (see 1:14, 51)—his body was destroyed and restored in three days through the resurrection, rendering the Jerusalem Temple and its services obsolete. Later...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60798,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61899,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Worship","title_en":"Temple Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","summary_en":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64496,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology","title_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","summary_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65254,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67198,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88424,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89525,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Worship","title_en":"Temple Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","summary_en":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92122,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology","title_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","summary_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92880,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94824,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116050,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117151,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Worship","title_en":"Temple Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","summary_en":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119748,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology","title_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","summary_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120506,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122450,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143676,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144777,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Worship","title_en":"Temple Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","summary_en":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147374,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology","title_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","summary_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148132,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150076,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":19258,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>JERUSALEM<\/h3>\n<p>Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n<p>• Geographical Situation<\/p>\n<p>• History<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MeaningoftheName\">Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n<h5>Egyptian Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries <span>BC<\/span> in the form probably transliterated <em>Urusalimum.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Semitic Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the 14th century <span>BC<\/span> the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Amarna, written <em>Urusalim.<\/em> Later it is found in the inscription of the Assyrian monarch Sennacherib, written <em>Ursalimmu.<\/em> The two transparently Semitic elements, <em>uru<\/em> (city) and <em>salim<\/em> (a divine name), have produced the hyphenated composite meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.” Hyphenating geographic names to incorporate divine elements was a common practice in the ancient Near Eastern world, and the deity Salim, or Shalem (Akkadian, Shulmanu; cf. Solomon), was a member of the Amorite pantheon (cf. Ez 16:3). Since the oldest textual evidence—Egyptian, West Semitic, and Akkadian—supports only <em>urusalim,<\/em> and since the OT itself attests that Jerusalem was not originally a Hebrew city, it is probable that the Semitic etymological origin of this name produced the meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.”<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew\/Aramaic Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the Hebrew OT, Jerusalem is written <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yerushalayim<\/span><em>,<\/em> and in the Aramaic portions the name is rendered <em>yerushalem.<\/em> Containing the elements <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yarah<\/span> (“to found,” cf. Jb 38:6) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalem<\/span> (a divine name), it yields the meaning “the foundation of [the god] Shalem,” the <em>sh<\/em> of the Hebrew\/Aramaic to be taken as the phonemic equivalent of the Akkadian <em>s.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Greek Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the NT, Jerusalem translates the two Greek words <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Ierousalem<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Hierosoluma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The former is simply the Greek transliteration of the OT Aramaic form; the latter reflects the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieros<\/span> (holy), representing a Hellenized paronomasia, corresponding neither with the Semitic root of the name nor with the city’s historical reality.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GeographicalSituation\">Geographical Situation<\/p>\n<p>Jerusalem is situated 31º 46’ 45” north latitude and 35º 13’ 25” east longitude. The city rises to just over 2,500 feet (762 meters) above sea level and rests some 14 miles (22.5 kilometers) west of the northern end of the Dead Sea and approximately 33 miles (53 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean coast.<\/p>\n<p>A Mediterranean climate pervades Jerusalem. From October to May, the city experiences its rainy season, with an annual accumulation of about 25 inches (63.5 centimeters). Throughout January and February the rains are often driven by winds, and the mercury drops to near freezing (cf. Ezr 10:9); the coldest weather coincides with the days of heaviest rainfall. Snow falls two years out of three. There is no rain between May and September, and a high percentage of solar radiation produces oppressive heat.<\/p>\n<p>Like Rome, Jerusalem is a city set on hills. A cluster of five hills comprise the denuded quadrilateral landmass roughly one mile (1.6 kilometers) long and one-half mile (.8 kilometer) wide, bordered on all sides, except the north, by deep ravines. Stationed astride the crest of Palestine’s central plateau and located at the crossroad of the watershed route connecting Hebron, Bethlehem, Shechem (Nablus), and points north with the longitudinal route from the Jordan Valley and the several arteries to the Mediterranean, Jerusalem is commercially central to the country. The lateral highway through the Judean mountains and eastward could not pass south of Jerusalem, being blocked by the Dead Sea and its sheer cliffs. Because it lacked significant water supply, the city’s strategic commercial location was probably the deciding criterion for its original occupation.<\/p>\n<p>Water, a lifeline of civilization, has always been in meager supply at Jerusalem. The only natural source of permanent water was the spring at Gihon, today sometimes called the Virgin’s Fountain, located in the Kidron Valley immediately east of the ancient fortress conquered by David. Tunnels were burrowed to provide access to the Gihon when Jerusalem was besieged. Later, the Siloam Tunnel was cut through nearly 1,800 feet (548.6 meters) of limestone, allowing the waters of the Gihon to pass through the hill of Zion to the pool of Siloam.<\/p>\n<p>Farther south, where the Kidron and Hinnom Valleys converge, there was another spring, called En-rogel in the Bible (modern Bir Eyyub). Owing to the lowering of the water table, this source of water ceased to percolate and was subsequently converted into a well.<\/p>\n<p>These two sources were clearly insufficient to sustain a sizable population, and both were too deep in the Kidron to be employed for irrigation. Hence, a vast network of cisterns, reservoirs, and water conduits for supplemental supply has been devised since ancient times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<h5>The Pre-Israelite Period<\/h5>\n<p>Paleolithic and Mesolithic flint implements of an Acheulian type found in the plain of the Rephaim constitute the earliest evidence of the existence of human beings in the area of Jerusalem. Near the beginning of the fourth millennium <span>BC<\/span>, the southeastern hill was first occupied by a sedentary group, a fact evinced from the artifactual remains recovered from three graves and the pottery type discovered on bedrock. By 1800 <span>BC<\/span>, the crest of the southeastern hill was walled in rudimentary form.<\/p>\n<p>From the Bible one learns that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem (Gn 14:17-20). Again (ch 22) the great patriarch visited an area later incorporated into Jerusalem, Mt Moriah, the site where Isaac was nearly sacrificed. Second Chronicles 3:1 identifies Mt Moriah as the temple hill. In the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> or thereabouts the Hurrians (possibly the biblical Horites) penetrated into Palestine. About the same time at Jerusalem, extensive building activities were initiated and improved fortification methods were introduced. Accordingly, most writers attribute these projects at Jerusalem to the Hurrian infiltration.<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest and Settlement Period<\/h5>\n<p>Upon learning of Gibeon’s placation of Joshua’s army (Jos 9), Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, formed a coalition with the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon and attacked Gibeon. In response, Joshua marshaled his forces and defeated the coalition, killing all five monarchs at Makkedah (Jos 10:16-27). It appears that the tribe of Judah temporarily took control of Jerusalem and burned it in the wake of this victory (Jgs 1:8). However, the Jebusites reoccupied the site (Jos 15:63; 1 Chr 11:4-5). Apparently, the Jebusites more or less maintained control of Jerusalem until the time of David.<\/p>\n<p>The city appears again as a boundary separating the tribal inheritances of Judah and Benjamin, becoming the southern border of the latter’s domain. The identification of the “shoulder of the Jebusite” (<span>rsv<\/span> Jos 15:8; 18:16) with Jerusalem is usually explained as a reference to the southwestern hill, probably held also by the Jebusites at this time.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Jerusalem<\/h5>\n<p>Following the Philistine victory atop Mt Gilboa, where Saul and Jonathan were killed in battle (1 Sm 31), David reigned over the tribe of Judah from Hebron, while a surviving son of Saul, Ishbosheth, ruled over the northern tribes from Mahanaim. During the two-year struggle that ensued, the house of David grew stronger while the forces of Ishbosheth shrunk considerably (2 Sm 3:1). This struggle culminated in the death and decapitation of Ishbosheth and the dispersion of his forces. David became the undisputed monarch of all the tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>But the new monarch recognized that a consolidated national capital acceptable to both the north and the south would have to be created. Jerusalem had remained neutral in the conflict, being the site of a Jebusite enclave. It also represented a location that was militarily desirable, and by being commercially central to the fledgling nation, it was ideally suited.<\/p>\n<p>In the course of David’s 33-year reign at Jerusalem he made the city into the center of an empire that stretched from Egypt to the Euphrates River. He engaged in considerable building and expansion of the city. He fortified the Canaanite walls and prepared an extension of the city, possibly along the east slope of Zion.<\/p>\n<p>David also constructed a royal residence, receiving the technology and many materials from Hiram, king of Tyre (2 Sm 5:11). Nehemiah 12:37 suggests that this palace also may have been near the east side of the southeastern hill. It was from a window of this house that Michal saw David dancing in an undignified manner—according to her perception (2 Sm 6:16-23). From the roof of this palace David gazed upon Bathsheba as she bathed (11:2-5), and from this residence he plotted the murder of her husband, Uriah (vv 14-25).<\/p>\n<p>By bringing the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6:1-15)—implying that Yahweh would reside there—David displayed his most profound leadership. For in this perceptive act he merged for the first time in Israel’s history its political and religious capitals. Jerusalem took on the unique character of a holy city <em>and<\/em> a royal city. As a result, the city would be known as the “city of David” (5:7) as well as the “city of God” (Ps 46:4). Adult male Jews would make their pilgrimages to Jerusalem to take part in the feasts and offerings. It only remained for David to make this arrangement permanent, to enshrine Yahweh at Jerusalem forever by building him a temple. David aspired to do so (2 Sm 7), but God responded that such an undertaking was to be reserved for a son of the king.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Temple Period<\/h5>\n<p>A growing national realization of the extent and impact of the Davidic empire was employed by Solomon to full advantage. Himself an innovative and dynamic administrator, Solomon turned Jerusalem into a cosmopolitan center. The revenues of caravans from Egypt to Babylonia as well as the Phoenician trade with Elath, the Red Sea, and Ophir passed through his royal capital. Solomon’s own naval fleet traveled as far as Tarshish, most likely located on an island along the western coast of Spain. These expeditions returned every three years with such exotic commodities as apes, peacocks, silver, iron, tin, ivory, and gold. The capital swelled with residents and visitors, and the monarch’s fame became proverbial (1 Kgs 10).<\/p>\n<p>Solomon was the great OT builder of Jerusalem. His most significant building enterprise was undoubtedly the first temple. Erected on the summit of the temple hill, this edifice required seven years to construct, from April\/May 966 (1 Kgs 6:1) to October\/November 959 (v 38). Hiram again provided both the technology and the cedar beams.<\/p>\n<p>One may find in 1 Kings 10:27 a succinct encapsulation of the economic wealth lavished upon Jerusalem by Solomon: silver became as abundant as stone, and cedar was as common as sycamore. It is estimated that the annual revenues that coursed into Jerusalem were as high as $17 million. Ironically, it was the fiscal factor that became the burden of Solomon’s monarchy. Overextending himself financially, his economic and political programs soon required the levying of heavy taxes (1 Kgs 4:7-19) and the drafting of Israelites into forced labor (1 Kgs 5:13-18; cf. 9:20-23). These were the primary factors that prompted the schism in Israel’s political structure after the death of Solomon and resulted in a divided monarchy by 930 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian army laid final siege to Jerusalem (588 <span>BC<\/span>), capturing it after many months, the city was completely decimated. The temple and Solomon’s palace were destroyed with fire; the city walls were demolished. The temple treasures were completely plundered, and the citizens were deported in large numbers.<\/p>\n<h5>The Second Temple Period<\/h5>\n<p>Jerusalem’s doom and 70-year captivity had been spelled out by Jeremiah (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. 2 Chr 36:21; Dn 9:2). In 538 <span>BC<\/span>, after the fall of Babylon, Cyrus, king of Persia, issued his famous proclamation (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1:1-4; cf. Is 44:28; 45:1). Thereupon, a humble group of Jews returned to Jerusalem with Sheshbazzar, a prince of Judah (Ezr 1:8-11) and Zerubbabel (2:2). In 515 <span>BC<\/span>, the doors of the second temple were opened officially, and the Passover feast was again observed from Jerusalem (6:15-18).<\/p>\n<p>Ezra came to Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes (Ezr 7:7). Assuming this is a reference to Artaxerxes I, the date of Ezra’s return would have been 458 <span>BC<\/span>. Again, it was only a meager remnant who felt the compelling urge to make that difficult journey (cf. Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.1.3).<\/p>\n<p>Moved by reports of troubled conditions (Neh 1:3-4), Nehemiah, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (445 <span>BC<\/span>), was able to leave his post as cup-bearer to the king and to go to Jerusalem. If the concern of the earlier returnees focused upon the temple, Nehemiah’s was upon the city walls. His is the most comprehensive description of Jerusalem’s postexilic city walls and topography (Neh 2:11-16). Spurred on by his energetic enthusiasm, the people completed the task of rebuilding the walls in 52 days (6:15).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Roman Period<\/h5>\n<p>In 40 <span>BC<\/span>, with the aid of the Parthians, Antigonus attacked and seized Jerusalem, forcing Herod to escape by night. He journeyed to Rome, where the Senate appointed him as “king of the Jews” (cf. Mt 2:1). Armed with this new authority, Herod marshaled two Roman legions, and in 37 <span>BC<\/span>, he succeeded in forever expelling the Parthians. So began the long and infamous rule of Herod, who reigned at Jerusalem for 33 years (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>It cannot be denied that Jerusalem enjoyed prosperous and peaceful years during his reign. Herod transformed the external aspect of Jerusalem. He transferred the seat of government to the southwestern hill. Here he erected a lavish palace, an arena for athletic contests, a theater, and a vast aqueduct network.<\/p>\n<p>Other building projects concerned the temple hill. Herod transformed the old Maccabean fortress into a much larger structure and named it Antonia, in honor of Mark Antony. In the temple area proper he enlarged the esplanade on both the north and south sides, giving it a rectangular shape. Herod’s reconstruction of the temple was undertaken in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and it was not completed until around <span>AD<\/span> 64, just six years prior to its destruction by Titus (cf. Jn 2:20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jerusalem, New; Judaism; Zion; Zion, Daughter of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JERUSALEM<\/h3>\n<p>Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n<p>• Geographical Situation<\/p>\n<p>• History<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MeaningoftheName\">Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n<h5>Egyptian Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries <span>BC<\/span> in the form probably transliterated <em>Urusalimum.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Semitic Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the 14th century <span>BC<\/span> the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Amarna, written <em>Urusalim.<\/em> Later it is found in the inscription of the Assyrian monarch Sennacherib, written <em>Ursalimmu.<\/em> The two transparently Semitic elements, <em>uru<\/em> (city) and <em>salim<\/em> (a divine name), have produced the hyphenated composite meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.” Hyphenating geographic names to incorporate divine elements was a common practice in the ancient Near Eastern world, and the deity Salim, or Shalem (Akkadian, Shulmanu; cf. Solomon), was a member of the Amorite pantheon (cf. Ez 16:3). Since the oldest textual evidence—Egyptian, West Semitic, and Akkadian—supports only <em>urusalim,<\/em> and since the OT itself attests that Jerusalem was not originally a Hebrew city, it is probable that the Semitic etymological origin of this name produced the meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.”<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew\/Aramaic Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the Hebrew OT, Jerusalem is written <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yerushalayim<\/span><em>,<\/em> and in the Aramaic portions the name is rendered <em>yerushalem.<\/em> Containing the elements <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yarah<\/span> (“to found,” cf. Jb 38:6) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalem<\/span> (a divine name), it yields the meaning “the foundation of [the god] Shalem,” the <em>sh<\/em> of the Hebrew\/Aramaic to be taken as the phonemic equivalent of the Akkadian <em>s.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Greek Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the NT, Jerusalem translates the two Greek words <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Ierousalem<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Hierosoluma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The former is simply the Greek transliteration of the OT Aramaic form; the latter reflects the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieros<\/span> (holy), representing a Hellenized paronomasia, corresponding neither with the Semitic root of the name nor with the city’s historical reality.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GeographicalSituation\">Geographical Situation<\/p>\n<p>Jerusalem is situated 31º 46’ 45” north latitude and 35º 13’ 25” east longitude. The city rises to just over 2,500 feet (762 meters) above sea level and rests some 14 miles (22.5 kilometers) west of the northern end of the Dead Sea and approximately 33 miles (53 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean coast.<\/p>\n<p>A Mediterranean climate pervades Jerusalem. From October to May, the city experiences its rainy season, with an annual accumulation of about 25 inches (63.5 centimeters). Throughout January and February the rains are often driven by winds, and the mercury drops to near freezing (cf. Ezr 10:9); the coldest weather coincides with the days of heaviest rainfall. Snow falls two years out of three. There is no rain between May and September, and a high percentage of solar radiation produces oppressive heat.<\/p>\n<p>Like Rome, Jerusalem is a city set on hills. A cluster of five hills comprise the denuded quadrilateral landmass roughly one mile (1.6 kilometers) long and one-half mile (.8 kilometer) wide, bordered on all sides, except the north, by deep ravines. Stationed astride the crest of Palestine’s central plateau and located at the crossroad of the watershed route connecting Hebron, Bethlehem, Shechem (Nablus), and points north with the longitudinal route from the Jordan Valley and the several arteries to the Mediterranean, Jerusalem is commercially central to the country. The lateral highway through the Judean mountains and eastward could not pass south of Jerusalem, being blocked by the Dead Sea and its sheer cliffs. Because it lacked significant water supply, the city’s strategic commercial location was probably the deciding criterion for its original occupation.<\/p>\n<p>Water, a lifeline of civilization, has always been in meager supply at Jerusalem. The only natural source of permanent water was the spring at Gihon, today sometimes called the Virgin’s Fountain, located in the Kidron Valley immediately east of the ancient fortress conquered by David. Tunnels were burrowed to provide access to the Gihon when Jerusalem was besieged. Later, the Siloam Tunnel was cut through nearly 1,800 feet (548.6 meters) of limestone, allowing the waters of the Gihon to pass through the hill of Zion to the pool of Siloam.<\/p>\n<p>Farther south, where the Kidron and Hinnom Valleys converge, there was another spring, called En-rogel in the Bible (modern Bir Eyyub). Owing to the lowering of the water table, this source of water ceased to percolate and was subsequently converted into a well.<\/p>\n<p>These two sources were clearly insufficient to sustain a sizable population, and both were too deep in the Kidron to be employed for irrigation. Hence, a vast network of cisterns, reservoirs, and water conduits for supplemental supply has been devised since ancient times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<h5>The Pre-Israelite Period<\/h5>\n<p>Paleolithic and Mesolithic flint implements of an Acheulian type found in the plain of the Rephaim constitute the earliest evidence of the existence of human beings in the area of Jerusalem. Near the beginning of the fourth millennium <span>BC<\/span>, the southeastern hill was first occupied by a sedentary group, a fact evinced from the artifactual remains recovered from three graves and the pottery type discovered on bedrock. By 1800 <span>BC<\/span>, the crest of the southeastern hill was walled in rudimentary form.<\/p>\n<p>From the Bible one learns that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem (Gn 14:17-20). Again (ch 22) the great patriarch visited an area later incorporated into Jerusalem, Mt Moriah, the site where Isaac was nearly sacrificed. Second Chronicles 3:1 identifies Mt Moriah as the temple hill. In the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> or thereabouts the Hurrians (possibly the biblical Horites) penetrated into Palestine. About the same time at Jerusalem, extensive building activities were initiated and improved fortification methods were introduced. Accordingly, most writers attribute these projects at Jerusalem to the Hurrian infiltration.<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest and Settlement Period<\/h5>\n<p>Upon learning of Gibeon’s placation of Joshua’s army (Jos 9), Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, formed a coalition with the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon and attacked Gibeon. In response, Joshua marshaled his forces and defeated the coalition, killing all five monarchs at Makkedah (Jos 10:16-27). It appears that the tribe of Judah temporarily took control of Jerusalem and burned it in the wake of this victory (Jgs 1:8). However, the Jebusites reoccupied the site (Jos 15:63; 1 Chr 11:4-5). Apparently, the Jebusites more or less maintained control of Jerusalem until the time of David.<\/p>\n<p>The city appears again as a boundary separating the tribal inheritances of Judah and Benjamin, becoming the southern border of the latter’s domain. The identification of the “shoulder of the Jebusite” (<span>rsv<\/span> Jos 15:8; 18:16) with Jerusalem is usually explained as a reference to the southwestern hill, probably held also by the Jebusites at this time.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Jerusalem<\/h5>\n<p>Following the Philistine victory atop Mt Gilboa, where Saul and Jonathan were killed in battle (1 Sm 31), David reigned over the tribe of Judah from Hebron, while a surviving son of Saul, Ishbosheth, ruled over the northern tribes from Mahanaim. During the two-year struggle that ensued, the house of David grew stronger while the forces of Ishbosheth shrunk considerably (2 Sm 3:1). This struggle culminated in the death and decapitation of Ishbosheth and the dispersion of his forces. David became the undisputed monarch of all the tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>But the new monarch recognized that a consolidated national capital acceptable to both the north and the south would have to be created. Jerusalem had remained neutral in the conflict, being the site of a Jebusite enclave. It also represented a location that was militarily desirable, and by being commercially central to the fledgling nation, it was ideally suited.<\/p>\n<p>In the course of David’s 33-year reign at Jerusalem he made the city into the center of an empire that stretched from Egypt to the Euphrates River. He engaged in considerable building and expansion of the city. He fortified the Canaanite walls and prepared an extension of the city, possibly along the east slope of Zion.<\/p>\n<p>David also constructed a royal residence, receiving the technology and many materials from Hiram, king of Tyre (2 Sm 5:11). Nehemiah 12:37 suggests that this palace also may have been near the east side of the southeastern hill. It was from a window of this house that Michal saw David dancing in an undignified manner—according to her perception (2 Sm 6:16-23). From the roof of this palace David gazed upon Bathsheba as she bathed (11:2-5), and from this residence he plotted the murder of her husband, Uriah (vv 14-25).<\/p>\n<p>By bringing the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6:1-15)—implying that Yahweh would reside there—David displayed his most profound leadership. For in this perceptive act he merged for the first time in Israel’s history its political and religious capitals. Jerusalem took on the unique character of a holy city <em>and<\/em> a royal city. As a result, the city would be known as the “city of David” (5:7) as well as the “city of God” (Ps 46:4). Adult male Jews would make their pilgrimages to Jerusalem to take part in the feasts and offerings. It only remained for David to make this arrangement permanent, to enshrine Yahweh at Jerusalem forever by building him a temple. David aspired to do so (2 Sm 7), but God responded that such an undertaking was to be reserved for a son of the king.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Temple Period<\/h5>\n<p>A growing national realization of the extent and impact of the Davidic empire was employed by Solomon to full advantage. Himself an innovative and dynamic administrator, Solomon turned Jerusalem into a cosmopolitan center. The revenues of caravans from Egypt to Babylonia as well as the Phoenician trade with Elath, the Red Sea, and Ophir passed through his royal capital. Solomon’s own naval fleet traveled as far as Tarshish, most likely located on an island along the western coast of Spain. These expeditions returned every three years with such exotic commodities as apes, peacocks, silver, iron, tin, ivory, and gold. The capital swelled with residents and visitors, and the monarch’s fame became proverbial (1 Kgs 10).<\/p>\n<p>Solomon was the great OT builder of Jerusalem. His most significant building enterprise was undoubtedly the first temple. Erected on the summit of the temple hill, this edifice required seven years to construct, from April\/May 966 (1 Kgs 6:1) to October\/November 959 (v 38). Hiram again provided both the technology and the cedar beams.<\/p>\n<p>One may find in 1 Kings 10:27 a succinct encapsulation of the economic wealth lavished upon Jerusalem by Solomon: silver became as abundant as stone, and cedar was as common as sycamore. It is estimated that the annual revenues that coursed into Jerusalem were as high as $17 million. Ironically, it was the fiscal factor that became the burden of Solomon’s monarchy. Overextending himself financially, his economic and political programs soon required the levying of heavy taxes (1 Kgs 4:7-19) and the drafting of Israelites into forced labor (1 Kgs 5:13-18; cf. 9:20-23). These were the primary factors that prompted the schism in Israel’s political structure after the death of Solomon and resulted in a divided monarchy by 930 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian army laid final siege to Jerusalem (588 <span>BC<\/span>), capturing it after many months, the city was completely decimated. The temple and Solomon’s palace were destroyed with fire; the city walls were demolished. The temple treasures were completely plundered, and the citizens were deported in large numbers.<\/p>\n<h5>The Second Temple Period<\/h5>\n<p>Jerusalem’s doom and 70-year captivity had been spelled out by Jeremiah (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. 2 Chr 36:21; Dn 9:2). In 538 <span>BC<\/span>, after the fall of Babylon, Cyrus, king of Persia, issued his famous proclamation (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1:1-4; cf. Is 44:28; 45:1). Thereupon, a humble group of Jews returned to Jerusalem with Sheshbazzar, a prince of Judah (Ezr 1:8-11) and Zerubbabel (2:2). In 515 <span>BC<\/span>, the doors of the second temple were opened officially, and the Passover feast was again observed from Jerusalem (6:15-18).<\/p>\n<p>Ezra came to Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes (Ezr 7:7). Assuming this is a reference to Artaxerxes I, the date of Ezra’s return would have been 458 <span>BC<\/span>. Again, it was only a meager remnant who felt the compelling urge to make that difficult journey (cf. Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.1.3).<\/p>\n<p>Moved by reports of troubled conditions (Neh 1:3-4), Nehemiah, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (445 <span>BC<\/span>), was able to leave his post as cup-bearer to the king and to go to Jerusalem. If the concern of the earlier returnees focused upon the temple, Nehemiah’s was upon the city walls. His is the most comprehensive description of Jerusalem’s postexilic city walls and topography (Neh 2:11-16). Spurred on by his energetic enthusiasm, the people completed the task of rebuilding the walls in 52 days (6:15).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Roman Period<\/h5>\n<p>In 40 <span>BC<\/span>, with the aid of the Parthians, Antigonus attacked and seized Jerusalem, forcing Herod to escape by night. He journeyed to Rome, where the Senate appointed him as “king of the Jews” (cf. Mt 2:1). Armed with this new authority, Herod marshaled two Roman legions, and in 37 <span>BC<\/span>, he succeeded in forever expelling the Parthians. So began the long and infamous rule of Herod, who reigned at Jerusalem for 33 years (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>It cannot be denied that Jerusalem enjoyed prosperous and peaceful years during his reign. Herod transformed the external aspect of Jerusalem. He transferred the seat of government to the southwestern hill. Here he erected a lavish palace, an arena for athletic contests, a theater, and a vast aqueduct network.<\/p>\n<p>Other building projects concerned the temple hill. Herod transformed the old Maccabean fortress into a much larger structure and named it Antonia, in honor of Mark Antony. In the temple area proper he enlarged the esplanade on both the north and south sides, giving it a rectangular shape. Herod’s reconstruction of the temple was undertaken in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and it was not completed until around <span>AD<\/span> 64, just six years prior to its destruction by Titus (cf. Jn 2:20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jerusalem, New; Judaism; Zion; Zion, Daughter of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JERUSALEM Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel. Preview • Meaning of the Name • Geographical Situation • History Meaning of the Name Egyptian Meaning The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum. Semitic Meaning In the 14th century BC the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Ama...","summary_en":"JERUSALEM Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel. Preview • Meaning of the Name • Geographical Situation • History Meaning of the Name Egyptian Meaning The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum. Semitic Meaning In the 14th century BC the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Ama...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21077,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judaism","title_en":"Judaism","content_ro":"<h3>JUDAISM<\/h3>\n<p>Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 <span>BC<\/span>) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheSecondTemple\">The Period of the Second Temple (515 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 <span>BC<\/span> on the part of the 10 northern tribes by levying unreasonably high taxes (1 Kgs 12). From that time on, the kingdoms of Israel (or Samaria, the northern kingdom) and Judah (the southern kingdom) maintained a separate existence. The northern kingdom fell to the Assyrians in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, and thousands of captives, primarily members of the upper class, were exiled forcibly and taken to Assyria, where they presumably intermarried with the native population and disappeared from history. The kingdom of Judah survived as an independent state until 597 <span>BC<\/span>, when it came under the control of the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. The temple was finally destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span> and many captives were carried off to Babylonia, beginning a period of exile that was to last two generations. The Babylonians were defeated by Cyrus the Persian in 539 <span>BC<\/span>, and the following year the king issued a decree permitting all captive peoples to return to the lands of their origin (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1). At least four waves of Jewish expatriates returned from Mesopotamia to Judea during the century following the decree of Cyrus, under such leaders as Sheshbazzar, Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Many Jews, however, chose to remain in their adopted Mesopotamian homeland. The dedication of the second temple in the spring of 515 <span>BC<\/span> provided a formal end to the exilic period of 70 years (Jer 29:10), and was a direct result of the prophetic exhortations of Haggai and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>In Judea the Jewish people were ruled by governors who held office at the pleasure of the Persian king. One of the earlier governors was Zerubabbel (Hg 1:1; 2:1-2), a descendant of David (1 Chr 3:10-19). In some way he shared rule with the high priest Jeshua ben Jehozadak. Palestine was part of one of the 20 satrapies of the Persian Empire, which lasted from 539 to 331 <span>BC<\/span>, when it fell to the Greeks under Alexander the Great. Little is known about the historical developments in Palestine during most of the Persian period. When Alexander died in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, his empire was divided up among his generals; Egypt and Palestine fell to Ptolemy I. The Ptolemies were benevolent despots who allowed the Jews of Palestine a measure of freedom and autonomy. After the battle of Paneion in 198 <span>BC<\/span>, Palestine came under the rule of the Seleucid Empire, founded by Seleucus I, another of Alexander’s generals.<\/p>\n<p>The Seleucid Empire embraced a very large area with a diverse population, extending from Asia Minor and Palestine in the west to the borders of India on the east. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) ascended the Seleucid throne in 175 <span>BC<\/span> and attempted to unify his vast empire by Hellenizing it (i.e., by forcing the adoption of Greek language and culture). Local cultures and religions were forcibly suppressed as a result of this policy, and the Jewish state in Palestine was perhaps the hardest hit of all. In 167 <span>BC<\/span> Antiochus IV dedicated the temple in Jerusalem to Olympian Zeus, sacrificed a sow on the altar, destroyed scrolls containing the Jewish Scriptures, and forbade the rite of circumcision. This repression triggered a revolt led by an aged priest named Mattathias and his sons. The Seleucids were repulsed, and finally in 164 <span>BC<\/span> the temple was retaken by Mattathias’s son Judas the Maccabee (an epithet meaning “the hammer”). This Jewish victory has been commemorated annually by the festival of Hanukkah (“dedication”). Judas and his brothers, called Maccabees or Hasmoneans (Mattathias was of the house of Hasmon), and their descendants ruled Judea from 164 to 63 <span>BC<\/span>, when Palestine fell to the Roman general Pompey. Thereafter, Palestine remained a vassal of Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Hyrcanus, a Hasmonean, was high priest after the conquest of Judea by the Romans, though Antipater (an Idumean) was the real power behind Hyrcanus. The sons of Antipater, Phasael and Herod, were governors of Jerusalem and Galilee, respectively. Upon the assassination of Antipater in 43 <span>BC<\/span>, and through his connections in Rome, Herod (later called Herod the Great) was named king of Judea by the Roman senate; he reigned from 37 to 4 <span>BC<\/span>. When he died, Palestine was divided up by the emperor Augustus (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14) and placed under the governorship of three of Herod’s sons: Herod Archelaus (ethnarch of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 6), Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39), and Herod Philip (tetrarch of Batanea, Trachonitis, and other small states from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 34). These territories were generally placed under Roman procurators after the sons of Herod had died or been deposed. For a brief period (<span>AD<\/span> 41–44), Herod Agrippa I, the grandson of Herod the Great, ruled virtually the same territory as his grandfather. Upon his death (narrated in Acts 12:20-23), his territories were placed under Roman procurators. The greed and ineptitude of these procurators provoked the Jewish populace to rebel. The ill-fated Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 resulted in the destruction of the second temple by the tenth Roman legion under Titus in <span>AD<\/span> 70. The revolt was completely quelled in <span>AD<\/span> 73, when more than 900 Jews under siege in the desert fortress of Masada near the Dead Sea committed mass suicide rather than fall into Roman hands. These tragic events ended permanently the temple cult and the priestly system in Judaism.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>The Babylonian conquest of Judea and the destruction of the Solomonic temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span> produced dramatic social and religious changes in Jewish life. The cessation of the temple cult struck a serious blow at the heart of the Israelite religion, since the Jerusalem temple alone was the legitimate and divinely appointed place for discharging much of the ritual requirement of the Mosaic law, chiefly the sacrificial cult. Even the three annual pilgrimage festivals, Succoth (Tabernacles), Pesach (Passover), and Shavuoth (Weeks) could no longer be observed by pious Jews who had remained in Judea after 586 <span>BC<\/span>. When after 538 <span>BC<\/span> many exiles chose to return to Judea, many others elected to remain in their new homeland. For the latter, the temple cult, even when reinstituted in 516 <span>BC<\/span>, could no longer play a significant role in their religious lives.<\/p>\n<p>During the exilic and early postexilic period, the peculiar Jewish institution of the synagogue (a Greek word meaning “gathering place”) began to evolve. The synagogue became such a popular and useful institution for Jewish communities outside Palestine that in the centuries after the dedication of the second temple they sprang up throughout Palestine, many in Jerusalem itself. By the end of the second temple period, the synagogue had come to play three important functions in Jewish life: it served as a house of prayer, a house of study, and a place of assembly. First-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship is illustrated in Luke 4:16-30 and Acts 13:13-42. The focus of the service was a reading of a selection from the Torah (Law of Moses), then one from the Haphtorah (Prophets). These readings were followed by a homily based on Scripture. Other elements in first-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship included the recitation of the Shema (“Hear, O Israel”), a combination of biblical passages including Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21 and Numbers 15:37-41, and the Shemoneh Esreh (Eighteen Benedictions) called the Amidah (“standing”) because it was recited while standing upright. Jews also wore fringes on their garments in obedience to Numbers 15:38-39 (Mt 23:5), and phylacteries on their foreheads and left arms. Phylacteries are little boxes containing the portions of Scripture recited in Shema; they were used in literal fulfillment of the command in Deuteronomy 6:8. Archaeologists have discovered first-century phylacteries in the ruins of Masada.<\/p>\n<p>Outside of Palestine, Mesopotamia became the second most important center of Judaism. The Babylonian Jewish community was known as the Golah (“captivity”), and its titular head was called the Resh Galuta or Exilarch (both terms mean “leader of the captivity”). By the end of the exilic period, the descendants of the ancient original captives had forgotten Hebrew and had adopted Aramaic, the international language of the ancient Near East and sister language to Hebrew, as their first language. Even in Palestine, Aramaic was the primary language spoken. Thus, when portions of Scripture were read in synagogue services in Hebrew, most of those present were unable to understand what was read. This problem was solved by providing a methurgeman (translator) who would translate orally short sections of Scripture. Eventually these targums (“translations”) were reduced to writing, beginning in the second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, it had been estimated that there were from four to seven million Jews in the Greco-Roman world, perhaps three to four times the population of Palestine. Jews in lands outside of Palestine came to be known collectively as the Diaspora (“scattering”). After the Greeks dominated the Mediterranean world through Alexander and his successors, Greek became the common language throughout this region. Just as Mesopotamian Jews spoke Aramaic in place of Hebrew, so Jews in the Greco-Roman world came to speak Greek. By the middle of the third century <span>BC<\/span>, Hellenistic Jews began to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. This translation, called the Septuagint (a term meaning “seventy,” based on a legend that it was translated simultaneously by seventy Jewish scholars), contained a more extensive canon of Scripture than that recognized by Palestinian Judaism. This reflects the more liberal attitudes of Hellenistic Jews.<\/p>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, most of the major sects within Palestinian Judaism came into being. The Hasidim (“pious”) were members of a religious association that aided the Hasmoneans in the revolt against the Seleucids (1 Macc 2:42; 7:13) but later opposed them when they claimed rights to the priesthood. Both the Pharisees and Essenes may have their origin in this religious sect. The Sadducees were perhaps connected with Zadok, a high priest appointed by David. Zadok’s descendants were regarded as the only legitimate priestly line; they were devoted above the Levites in Ezekiel 40–48. The Sadducees were a wealthy, aristocratic class that monopolized the high priesthood. They did not believe in angels, spirits, life after death, or the resurrection (Acts 23:8), nor did they accept the validity of the oral law as developed by the Pharisees. They left no writings and disappeared with the destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees (“separated ones”) first appear in our sources toward the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span> and were involved primarily in political affairs. They represented the common people against the tyrannical Hasmonean ruler Alexander Janneus (103–76 <span>BC<\/span>), who had hundreds of Pharisees executed in reprisal. By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, the Pharisees seem wholly concerned with religious matters and were noted for the scrupulous observance of the Mosaic law as traditionally interpreted. On grounds of ritual purity, they separated themselves from other Jews who were not as scrupulous and who might contaminate them. Pharisees went about in groups called Haberim (“associates”) in which they were insulated from those who were lax religiously. In their zeal to remain faithful to the Mosaic law, the Pharisees developed an oral law (later erroneously attributed to Moses) that served as a fence around the Torah. This oral law was an interpretation and expansion of the 613 commands in the Mosaic law; it was finally compiled and reduced to written form as the Mishnah (“teaching”) in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>. Paul (Acts 22:3; 23:6; 26:5; Phil 3:5) and many other early Christians were converts from Pharisaism (Acts 15:5). Pharisaic Judaism survived the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 to form the rabbinic Judaism that dominated Jewish religious life from the second century <span>AD<\/span> to modern times.<\/p>\n<p>The Essenes were another religious sect within Judaism that had its origins in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. Like the Pharisees, the Essenes were concerned principally with maintaining ritual purity in obedience to the law of Moses. The Essenes lived and worked in Jewish society; they tried to influence people by the simple, altruistic life they followed. Some Essenes also lived in their own communities, to which they returned each night after work. There were numerous religious factions within Judaism, and one such group, which may only have had vague connections with the Essenes, established a community on the western shore of the Dead Sea. This group regarded itself as the true Israel and in the wilderness prepared for the final visitation of God by keeping themselves pure from all defilement. Many documents written by members of this sect were discovered in caves near the Dead Sea where they had been hidden just before the Romans destroyed the settlement. These documents, the Dead Sea Scrolls, have provided detailed information about this religious sect and its beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>The Zealots were another Jewish sect, who may be related to the Sicarii (“dagger men”). This group of political activists flourished from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 66. Regarding God alone as their sovereign, they attempted to overthrow the Romans and those who collaborated with them by violent means, including assassination. They helped to foment the Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 and perished with Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>Social class and status in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine were determined in accordance with the rules of ritual purity. The upper class comprised members of the religious establishment, such as the Sadducees, scribes, Pharisees, and Jerusalem priests. The Sanhedrin was a deliberative body whose membership was drawn from these groups. For all practical purposes there was no middle class. The lower class consisted primarily of the Am Ha Arez (“people of the land”)—Jews who were ignorant of the law through lack of education and who did not scrupulously observe those commandments with which they were familiar. The generally hostile attitude of the Pharisees toward the Am Ha Arez is expressed in John 7:49: “But this crowd, who do not know the law, are accursed” (<span>rsv<\/span>). There was yet another social class in first-century Palestine, which can be designated as “untouchables.” This group was composed of Samaritans, tax collectors, prostitutes, shepherds, lepers, Gentiles, and perhaps worst of all, Jews who became as Gentiles (e.g., the prodigal son of Lk 15:11-32). The rules of ritual purity as generally observed prevented any form of social contact between the upper class and the untouchables, and made contacts with the Am Ha Arez highly undesirable. Against this background, the horror of the Pharisees over Jesus’ association with tax collectors and sinners is throughly understandable (Mk 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>A further consequence of this religious criterion for determining social class and status was an uneasy tension between Jerusalem and the rural areas of Palestine, particularly Galilee, during the last two centuries of the second temple period. Those in Jerusalem regarded Galilee as a place where ignorance of the Torah was the rule (Jn 1:46). Jerusalem was primarily a religious center, whose major industry was the temple cult. The total population of Jerusalem in the first century <span>AD<\/span> has been estimated at 25,000 to 40,000. Most of these were either artisans and craftsmen devoted to building and adorning the temple (still incomplete before it was destroyed; see Jn 2:20) or priests and Levites involved in the many ritual activities of the temple. Though Jews were expected to travel to Jerusalem for each of the three annual pilgrimage festivals, this requirement proved difficult for rural Palestinian farmers.<\/p>\n<p>Further, the tithe demanded by Mosaic command was only on the produce of the land, not upon wages or bartered goods. The rural farmers, therefore, bore the brunt of this taxation and quite naturally resented the privileged position of urban artisans, merchants, and priests who were not obliged to tithe. The temptation not to tithe the produce of the land was very great, and many farmers succumbed to it. Their untithed produce was not kosher, and thus to be avoided by those, like the Pharisees, who were religiously scrupulous. In addition to the first and second tithes demanded of farmers (the second tithe had to be spent in the vicinity of Jerusalem), it has been estimated that Roman tax levies amounted to 10 to 15 percent of an individual’s income. Religious taxes, together with Roman taxes, added up to a crushing tax burden of from 25 to 30 percent. The fact that the Jews finally revolted against their Roman oppressors in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is not difficult to comprehend. Throughout the first century <span>AD<\/span>, in fact, minor revolts in Palestine occurred with predictable frequency. Many of these occurred during the three annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem, when the normal population of 25,000 to 40,000 swelled to 500,000 or more. These festivals provided ideal opportunities for uprisings, and the Romans were particularly alert for such eventualities. Jesus was executed during one such Passover festival because he was suspected of being a political revolutionary (Mk 15:26).<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period provided the setting for the rise and fall of apocalypticism within Judaism. Apocalypticism (from a Greek word meaning “revelation”) was a kind of eschatology (“account of final events”) that assumed that ideal conditions could not be restored on earth unless God first intervened climactically to destroy evil (particularly foreign oppressors) and vindicate the righteous (Israel). Apocalyptic visionaries composed many documents, called apocalypses, in which they attempted to read the signs of the times and predict the coming of the visitation of God. Since there was a widespread consciousness that the era of prophecy was over, these apocalyptists wrote not under their own names but under the names of ancient Israelite worthies, such as Moses, Abraham, Enoch, and Ezra. Among the more significant expectations of Jewish apocalypticism were (1) the coming of a Messiah; (2) the coming of a great period of tribulation, sometimes called the messianic woes; (3) the resurrection of the just; (4) the judgment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Apocalyptic beliefs probably provided the motivation for most—if not all—of the Jewish revolts against the Romans.<\/p>\n\n<p>Some portions of the Hebrew Scriptures were still in the process of composition at the beginning of the second temple period. The last three prophetic books—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—were written from the end of the sixth century to the mid fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. Later rabbis expressed the opinion that the Spirit of God had been taken from Israel when these prophets ceased their labors. The Chronicler ends his work by referring to the decree of Cyrus (538 <span>BC<\/span>), and both Ezra-Nehemiah and Esther appear to have been written in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period witnessed not only the completion of those writings that were later regarded as inspired and authoritative in Judaism but also the full recognition of all 24 sacred books. Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the Mosaic law had not been observed with any consistency (according to 2 Kgs 22 it had been mislaid for an unknown period of time), nor had the classical prophets always received appropriate recognition. But after 586 <span>BC<\/span> the Torah occupied a position of unquestioned sanctity in the lives and thoughts of the Jewish people, replacing in many respects the temple cult even before its final dissolution in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish Scriptures are divided into three sections, designated by Jews with the acrostic “Tanak”: (1) Torah (“Law” or “Revelation”), (2) Nebi’im (“Prophets”), and (3) Kethubim (“Writings”). It is generally claimed that while the Law and Prophets enjoyed canonical status prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the Writings were finally declared canonical at the rabbinic council of Jamnia (c. <span>AD<\/span> 90), though the historicity of this is disputed. The rabbis are thought to have discussed whether certain biblical books should continue to be part of Scripture. In reality, the Jewish canon of Scripture was fully defined from traditional usage by the first century <span>BC<\/span>. The Law consisted of five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The Prophets consisted of two sections, the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets). The Writings included Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Ruth, and Daniel. The total number of books in this canon is 24, identical with the Protestant canon of 39 books, since Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, and the 12 are each counted as only one book. The Alexandrian canon of Hellenistic Judaism was more extensive, and the extra books (called Apocrypha by Protestants) are all found in the Roman Catholic OT canon of 46 books.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTalmudicPeriod\">The Talmudic Period (<span>AD<\/span> 73–425)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>According to Jewish legend, when the Romans were about to conquer Jerusalem in the revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73, a prominent Pharisee, Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, feigned death and his disciples were permitted to carry him out of the besieged city in a coffin. The more likely scenario is that he received permission from the Romans to move his school from Jerusalem to Jamnia, on the coast of Palestine. The temple cult and the priestly system had disappeared, and rabbinic academies such as that of Rabbi Johanan set themselves to the enormous task of reconstructing Judaism. The older Sanhedrin was reinstituted as the Beth Din (“Court of Law”), and Gamaliel II, a grandson of Hillel, who had presided over the old Sanhedrin, became its leader with the title Nasi (“prince”), or Patriarch. The patriarchate continued until <span>AD<\/span> 425, when Emperor Theodosius II abolished the office upon the death of the last patriarch, Gamaliel VI. In Mesopotamia, Babylonian Judaism experienced a renaissance that lasted until the end of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. This period was called the Age of the Gaonim (“excellencies”) after the heads of the two great rabbinic academies at Sura and Pumpeditha. It was there that the great Babylonian Talmud was compiled by the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 115 various Jewish communities throughout the eastern Mediterranean, including Egypt, Cyprus, and Cyrene, revolted against the Roman emperor Trajan. Without exception these revolts were all put down by Roman legions. Finally, when the emperor Hadrian was on the brink of founding the new city of Aelia Capitolina on the site of old Jerusalem, the Jews again revolted in <span>AD<\/span> 132, led by a self-proclaimed messiah, Simeon Bar Koziba, who was called Bar-Kochba (“Son of a Star”) by his followers as an allusion to the messianic passage in Numbers 24:17. Bar-Kochba was aided by the famous rabbinic scholar Akiba. This revolt, though initially successful, was put down by the Romans under Julius Severus in 135. Shortly thereafter, Hadrian issued a decree banning all Jews from the new Aelia Capitolina.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>During this period, the result of generations of rabbinical scholarship bore fruit with the compilation of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. The rabbinic sages consciously saw themselves as the heirs of the ancient Israelite prophets, who in turn were the heirs of the Mosaic law. They distinguished consciously between their own legal interpretations of the Mosaic law (which they called Halakah, or “walking,” i.e., a guide for life), and the commands in the Torah itself (called Mitvah, or “commandment”). The oral law, developed through generations of rabbinic discussion, was finally compiled and written down through the efforts of the patriarch Judah ha-Nasi (c. <span>AD<\/span> 135–220) during the last quarter of the second century <span>AD<\/span> and became known as the Mishnah (“teaching”). This is a topical arrangement of rabbinic discussions on such subjects as the Sabbath, firstfruits, sacrifices, and women. The Mishnah became the basis for further rabbinic discussion in both Palestine and Babylonia. The decisions of sages who flourished after the writing of the Mishnah were compiled about <span>AD<\/span> 450 in Palestine and about 500 in Babylonia. This second stage beyond the Mishnah was called the Gemara (meaning either “completion” or “repetition”). The Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara make up the Babylonian Talmud, while the same Mishnah with the Jerusalem or Palestinian Gemara comprises the Jerusalem Talmud. Yet another type of rabbinic literature is the Midrashim (“interpretations”), which either follow the order of a particular biblical book or consist of homilies on particular biblical texts. The Targums, paraphrastic translations of Scripture into the Aramaic language, finally came to be written down beginning in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>After the destruction of the temple, rabbinic Judaism concentrated on the religious significance of the Torah and elevated scholarship to the central role that it still plays in Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism gradually exerted its influence upon diaspora Judaism under the initial leadership of Rabbi Johanan until a kind of rabbinic orthodoxy emerged during the second century. Christianity was one of the major ideological foes of rabbinic Judaism. In order to purge Jewish Christians from their midst, the rabbis introduced an additional benediction to the eighteen benedictions customarily recited at synagogue services. This 19th benediction was a curse upon the <em>minim<\/em> (Christians and other heretics), which Jewish Christians who attended synagogue services found impossible to recite. The line was firmly drawn between Judaism and Christianity by this device, which was employed late in the first century.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead Sea Scrolls; Essenes; Diaspora of the Jews; First Jewish Revolt; Israel, History of; Jew; Judah, Tribe of; Judaism; Pharisees; Philo, Judaeus; Postexilic Period; Sanhedrin; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDAISM<\/h3>\n<p>Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 <span>BC<\/span>) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheSecondTemple\">The Period of the Second Temple (515 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 <span>BC<\/span> on the part of the 10 northern tribes by levying unreasonably high taxes (1 Kgs 12). From that time on, the kingdoms of Israel (or Samaria, the northern kingdom) and Judah (the southern kingdom) maintained a separate existence. The northern kingdom fell to the Assyrians in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, and thousands of captives, primarily members of the upper class, were exiled forcibly and taken to Assyria, where they presumably intermarried with the native population and disappeared from history. The kingdom of Judah survived as an independent state until 597 <span>BC<\/span>, when it came under the control of the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. The temple was finally destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span> and many captives were carried off to Babylonia, beginning a period of exile that was to last two generations. The Babylonians were defeated by Cyrus the Persian in 539 <span>BC<\/span>, and the following year the king issued a decree permitting all captive peoples to return to the lands of their origin (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1). At least four waves of Jewish expatriates returned from Mesopotamia to Judea during the century following the decree of Cyrus, under such leaders as Sheshbazzar, Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Many Jews, however, chose to remain in their adopted Mesopotamian homeland. The dedication of the second temple in the spring of 515 <span>BC<\/span> provided a formal end to the exilic period of 70 years (Jer 29:10), and was a direct result of the prophetic exhortations of Haggai and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>In Judea the Jewish people were ruled by governors who held office at the pleasure of the Persian king. One of the earlier governors was Zerubabbel (Hg 1:1; 2:1-2), a descendant of David (1 Chr 3:10-19). In some way he shared rule with the high priest Jeshua ben Jehozadak. Palestine was part of one of the 20 satrapies of the Persian Empire, which lasted from 539 to 331 <span>BC<\/span>, when it fell to the Greeks under Alexander the Great. Little is known about the historical developments in Palestine during most of the Persian period. When Alexander died in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, his empire was divided up among his generals; Egypt and Palestine fell to Ptolemy I. The Ptolemies were benevolent despots who allowed the Jews of Palestine a measure of freedom and autonomy. After the battle of Paneion in 198 <span>BC<\/span>, Palestine came under the rule of the Seleucid Empire, founded by Seleucus I, another of Alexander’s generals.<\/p>\n<p>The Seleucid Empire embraced a very large area with a diverse population, extending from Asia Minor and Palestine in the west to the borders of India on the east. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) ascended the Seleucid throne in 175 <span>BC<\/span> and attempted to unify his vast empire by Hellenizing it (i.e., by forcing the adoption of Greek language and culture). Local cultures and religions were forcibly suppressed as a result of this policy, and the Jewish state in Palestine was perhaps the hardest hit of all. In 167 <span>BC<\/span> Antiochus IV dedicated the temple in Jerusalem to Olympian Zeus, sacrificed a sow on the altar, destroyed scrolls containing the Jewish Scriptures, and forbade the rite of circumcision. This repression triggered a revolt led by an aged priest named Mattathias and his sons. The Seleucids were repulsed, and finally in 164 <span>BC<\/span> the temple was retaken by Mattathias’s son Judas the Maccabee (an epithet meaning “the hammer”). This Jewish victory has been commemorated annually by the festival of Hanukkah (“dedication”). Judas and his brothers, called Maccabees or Hasmoneans (Mattathias was of the house of Hasmon), and their descendants ruled Judea from 164 to 63 <span>BC<\/span>, when Palestine fell to the Roman general Pompey. Thereafter, Palestine remained a vassal of Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Hyrcanus, a Hasmonean, was high priest after the conquest of Judea by the Romans, though Antipater (an Idumean) was the real power behind Hyrcanus. The sons of Antipater, Phasael and Herod, were governors of Jerusalem and Galilee, respectively. Upon the assassination of Antipater in 43 <span>BC<\/span>, and through his connections in Rome, Herod (later called Herod the Great) was named king of Judea by the Roman senate; he reigned from 37 to 4 <span>BC<\/span>. When he died, Palestine was divided up by the emperor Augustus (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14) and placed under the governorship of three of Herod’s sons: Herod Archelaus (ethnarch of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 6), Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39), and Herod Philip (tetrarch of Batanea, Trachonitis, and other small states from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 34). These territories were generally placed under Roman procurators after the sons of Herod had died or been deposed. For a brief period (<span>AD<\/span> 41–44), Herod Agrippa I, the grandson of Herod the Great, ruled virtually the same territory as his grandfather. Upon his death (narrated in Acts 12:20-23), his territories were placed under Roman procurators. The greed and ineptitude of these procurators provoked the Jewish populace to rebel. The ill-fated Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 resulted in the destruction of the second temple by the tenth Roman legion under Titus in <span>AD<\/span> 70. The revolt was completely quelled in <span>AD<\/span> 73, when more than 900 Jews under siege in the desert fortress of Masada near the Dead Sea committed mass suicide rather than fall into Roman hands. These tragic events ended permanently the temple cult and the priestly system in Judaism.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>The Babylonian conquest of Judea and the destruction of the Solomonic temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span> produced dramatic social and religious changes in Jewish life. The cessation of the temple cult struck a serious blow at the heart of the Israelite religion, since the Jerusalem temple alone was the legitimate and divinely appointed place for discharging much of the ritual requirement of the Mosaic law, chiefly the sacrificial cult. Even the three annual pilgrimage festivals, Succoth (Tabernacles), Pesach (Passover), and Shavuoth (Weeks) could no longer be observed by pious Jews who had remained in Judea after 586 <span>BC<\/span>. When after 538 <span>BC<\/span> many exiles chose to return to Judea, many others elected to remain in their new homeland. For the latter, the temple cult, even when reinstituted in 516 <span>BC<\/span>, could no longer play a significant role in their religious lives.<\/p>\n<p>During the exilic and early postexilic period, the peculiar Jewish institution of the synagogue (a Greek word meaning “gathering place”) began to evolve. The synagogue became such a popular and useful institution for Jewish communities outside Palestine that in the centuries after the dedication of the second temple they sprang up throughout Palestine, many in Jerusalem itself. By the end of the second temple period, the synagogue had come to play three important functions in Jewish life: it served as a house of prayer, a house of study, and a place of assembly. First-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship is illustrated in Luke 4:16-30 and Acts 13:13-42. The focus of the service was a reading of a selection from the Torah (Law of Moses), then one from the Haphtorah (Prophets). These readings were followed by a homily based on Scripture. Other elements in first-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship included the recitation of the Shema (“Hear, O Israel”), a combination of biblical passages including Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21 and Numbers 15:37-41, and the Shemoneh Esreh (Eighteen Benedictions) called the Amidah (“standing”) because it was recited while standing upright. Jews also wore fringes on their garments in obedience to Numbers 15:38-39 (Mt 23:5), and phylacteries on their foreheads and left arms. Phylacteries are little boxes containing the portions of Scripture recited in Shema; they were used in literal fulfillment of the command in Deuteronomy 6:8. Archaeologists have discovered first-century phylacteries in the ruins of Masada.<\/p>\n<p>Outside of Palestine, Mesopotamia became the second most important center of Judaism. The Babylonian Jewish community was known as the Golah (“captivity”), and its titular head was called the Resh Galuta or Exilarch (both terms mean “leader of the captivity”). By the end of the exilic period, the descendants of the ancient original captives had forgotten Hebrew and had adopted Aramaic, the international language of the ancient Near East and sister language to Hebrew, as their first language. Even in Palestine, Aramaic was the primary language spoken. Thus, when portions of Scripture were read in synagogue services in Hebrew, most of those present were unable to understand what was read. This problem was solved by providing a methurgeman (translator) who would translate orally short sections of Scripture. Eventually these targums (“translations”) were reduced to writing, beginning in the second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, it had been estimated that there were from four to seven million Jews in the Greco-Roman world, perhaps three to four times the population of Palestine. Jews in lands outside of Palestine came to be known collectively as the Diaspora (“scattering”). After the Greeks dominated the Mediterranean world through Alexander and his successors, Greek became the common language throughout this region. Just as Mesopotamian Jews spoke Aramaic in place of Hebrew, so Jews in the Greco-Roman world came to speak Greek. By the middle of the third century <span>BC<\/span>, Hellenistic Jews began to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. This translation, called the Septuagint (a term meaning “seventy,” based on a legend that it was translated simultaneously by seventy Jewish scholars), contained a more extensive canon of Scripture than that recognized by Palestinian Judaism. This reflects the more liberal attitudes of Hellenistic Jews.<\/p>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, most of the major sects within Palestinian Judaism came into being. The Hasidim (“pious”) were members of a religious association that aided the Hasmoneans in the revolt against the Seleucids (1 Macc 2:42; 7:13) but later opposed them when they claimed rights to the priesthood. Both the Pharisees and Essenes may have their origin in this religious sect. The Sadducees were perhaps connected with Zadok, a high priest appointed by David. Zadok’s descendants were regarded as the only legitimate priestly line; they were devoted above the Levites in Ezekiel 40–48. The Sadducees were a wealthy, aristocratic class that monopolized the high priesthood. They did not believe in angels, spirits, life after death, or the resurrection (Acts 23:8), nor did they accept the validity of the oral law as developed by the Pharisees. They left no writings and disappeared with the destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees (“separated ones”) first appear in our sources toward the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span> and were involved primarily in political affairs. They represented the common people against the tyrannical Hasmonean ruler Alexander Janneus (103–76 <span>BC<\/span>), who had hundreds of Pharisees executed in reprisal. By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, the Pharisees seem wholly concerned with religious matters and were noted for the scrupulous observance of the Mosaic law as traditionally interpreted. On grounds of ritual purity, they separated themselves from other Jews who were not as scrupulous and who might contaminate them. Pharisees went about in groups called Haberim (“associates”) in which they were insulated from those who were lax religiously. In their zeal to remain faithful to the Mosaic law, the Pharisees developed an oral law (later erroneously attributed to Moses) that served as a fence around the Torah. This oral law was an interpretation and expansion of the 613 commands in the Mosaic law; it was finally compiled and reduced to written form as the Mishnah (“teaching”) in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>. Paul (Acts 22:3; 23:6; 26:5; Phil 3:5) and many other early Christians were converts from Pharisaism (Acts 15:5). Pharisaic Judaism survived the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 to form the rabbinic Judaism that dominated Jewish religious life from the second century <span>AD<\/span> to modern times.<\/p>\n<p>The Essenes were another religious sect within Judaism that had its origins in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. Like the Pharisees, the Essenes were concerned principally with maintaining ritual purity in obedience to the law of Moses. The Essenes lived and worked in Jewish society; they tried to influence people by the simple, altruistic life they followed. Some Essenes also lived in their own communities, to which they returned each night after work. There were numerous religious factions within Judaism, and one such group, which may only have had vague connections with the Essenes, established a community on the western shore of the Dead Sea. This group regarded itself as the true Israel and in the wilderness prepared for the final visitation of God by keeping themselves pure from all defilement. Many documents written by members of this sect were discovered in caves near the Dead Sea where they had been hidden just before the Romans destroyed the settlement. These documents, the Dead Sea Scrolls, have provided detailed information about this religious sect and its beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>The Zealots were another Jewish sect, who may be related to the Sicarii (“dagger men”). This group of political activists flourished from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 66. Regarding God alone as their sovereign, they attempted to overthrow the Romans and those who collaborated with them by violent means, including assassination. They helped to foment the Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 and perished with Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>Social class and status in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine were determined in accordance with the rules of ritual purity. The upper class comprised members of the religious establishment, such as the Sadducees, scribes, Pharisees, and Jerusalem priests. The Sanhedrin was a deliberative body whose membership was drawn from these groups. For all practical purposes there was no middle class. The lower class consisted primarily of the Am Ha Arez (“people of the land”)—Jews who were ignorant of the law through lack of education and who did not scrupulously observe those commandments with which they were familiar. The generally hostile attitude of the Pharisees toward the Am Ha Arez is expressed in John 7:49: “But this crowd, who do not know the law, are accursed” (<span>rsv<\/span>). There was yet another social class in first-century Palestine, which can be designated as “untouchables.” This group was composed of Samaritans, tax collectors, prostitutes, shepherds, lepers, Gentiles, and perhaps worst of all, Jews who became as Gentiles (e.g., the prodigal son of Lk 15:11-32). The rules of ritual purity as generally observed prevented any form of social contact between the upper class and the untouchables, and made contacts with the Am Ha Arez highly undesirable. Against this background, the horror of the Pharisees over Jesus’ association with tax collectors and sinners is throughly understandable (Mk 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>A further consequence of this religious criterion for determining social class and status was an uneasy tension between Jerusalem and the rural areas of Palestine, particularly Galilee, during the last two centuries of the second temple period. Those in Jerusalem regarded Galilee as a place where ignorance of the Torah was the rule (Jn 1:46). Jerusalem was primarily a religious center, whose major industry was the temple cult. The total population of Jerusalem in the first century <span>AD<\/span> has been estimated at 25,000 to 40,000. Most of these were either artisans and craftsmen devoted to building and adorning the temple (still incomplete before it was destroyed; see Jn 2:20) or priests and Levites involved in the many ritual activities of the temple. Though Jews were expected to travel to Jerusalem for each of the three annual pilgrimage festivals, this requirement proved difficult for rural Palestinian farmers.<\/p>\n<p>Further, the tithe demanded by Mosaic command was only on the produce of the land, not upon wages or bartered goods. The rural farmers, therefore, bore the brunt of this taxation and quite naturally resented the privileged position of urban artisans, merchants, and priests who were not obliged to tithe. The temptation not to tithe the produce of the land was very great, and many farmers succumbed to it. Their untithed produce was not kosher, and thus to be avoided by those, like the Pharisees, who were religiously scrupulous. In addition to the first and second tithes demanded of farmers (the second tithe had to be spent in the vicinity of Jerusalem), it has been estimated that Roman tax levies amounted to 10 to 15 percent of an individual’s income. Religious taxes, together with Roman taxes, added up to a crushing tax burden of from 25 to 30 percent. The fact that the Jews finally revolted against their Roman oppressors in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is not difficult to comprehend. Throughout the first century <span>AD<\/span>, in fact, minor revolts in Palestine occurred with predictable frequency. Many of these occurred during the three annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem, when the normal population of 25,000 to 40,000 swelled to 500,000 or more. These festivals provided ideal opportunities for uprisings, and the Romans were particularly alert for such eventualities. Jesus was executed during one such Passover festival because he was suspected of being a political revolutionary (Mk 15:26).<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period provided the setting for the rise and fall of apocalypticism within Judaism. Apocalypticism (from a Greek word meaning “revelation”) was a kind of eschatology (“account of final events”) that assumed that ideal conditions could not be restored on earth unless God first intervened climactically to destroy evil (particularly foreign oppressors) and vindicate the righteous (Israel). Apocalyptic visionaries composed many documents, called apocalypses, in which they attempted to read the signs of the times and predict the coming of the visitation of God. Since there was a widespread consciousness that the era of prophecy was over, these apocalyptists wrote not under their own names but under the names of ancient Israelite worthies, such as Moses, Abraham, Enoch, and Ezra. Among the more significant expectations of Jewish apocalypticism were (1) the coming of a Messiah; (2) the coming of a great period of tribulation, sometimes called the messianic woes; (3) the resurrection of the just; (4) the judgment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Apocalyptic beliefs probably provided the motivation for most—if not all—of the Jewish revolts against the Romans.<\/p>\n\n<p>Some portions of the Hebrew Scriptures were still in the process of composition at the beginning of the second temple period. The last three prophetic books—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—were written from the end of the sixth century to the mid fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. Later rabbis expressed the opinion that the Spirit of God had been taken from Israel when these prophets ceased their labors. The Chronicler ends his work by referring to the decree of Cyrus (538 <span>BC<\/span>), and both Ezra-Nehemiah and Esther appear to have been written in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period witnessed not only the completion of those writings that were later regarded as inspired and authoritative in Judaism but also the full recognition of all 24 sacred books. Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the Mosaic law had not been observed with any consistency (according to 2 Kgs 22 it had been mislaid for an unknown period of time), nor had the classical prophets always received appropriate recognition. But after 586 <span>BC<\/span> the Torah occupied a position of unquestioned sanctity in the lives and thoughts of the Jewish people, replacing in many respects the temple cult even before its final dissolution in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish Scriptures are divided into three sections, designated by Jews with the acrostic “Tanak”: (1) Torah (“Law” or “Revelation”), (2) Nebi’im (“Prophets”), and (3) Kethubim (“Writings”). It is generally claimed that while the Law and Prophets enjoyed canonical status prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the Writings were finally declared canonical at the rabbinic council of Jamnia (c. <span>AD<\/span> 90), though the historicity of this is disputed. The rabbis are thought to have discussed whether certain biblical books should continue to be part of Scripture. In reality, the Jewish canon of Scripture was fully defined from traditional usage by the first century <span>BC<\/span>. The Law consisted of five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The Prophets consisted of two sections, the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets). The Writings included Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Ruth, and Daniel. The total number of books in this canon is 24, identical with the Protestant canon of 39 books, since Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, and the 12 are each counted as only one book. The Alexandrian canon of Hellenistic Judaism was more extensive, and the extra books (called Apocrypha by Protestants) are all found in the Roman Catholic OT canon of 46 books.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTalmudicPeriod\">The Talmudic Period (<span>AD<\/span> 73–425)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>According to Jewish legend, when the Romans were about to conquer Jerusalem in the revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73, a prominent Pharisee, Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, feigned death and his disciples were permitted to carry him out of the besieged city in a coffin. The more likely scenario is that he received permission from the Romans to move his school from Jerusalem to Jamnia, on the coast of Palestine. The temple cult and the priestly system had disappeared, and rabbinic academies such as that of Rabbi Johanan set themselves to the enormous task of reconstructing Judaism. The older Sanhedrin was reinstituted as the Beth Din (“Court of Law”), and Gamaliel II, a grandson of Hillel, who had presided over the old Sanhedrin, became its leader with the title Nasi (“prince”), or Patriarch. The patriarchate continued until <span>AD<\/span> 425, when Emperor Theodosius II abolished the office upon the death of the last patriarch, Gamaliel VI. In Mesopotamia, Babylonian Judaism experienced a renaissance that lasted until the end of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. This period was called the Age of the Gaonim (“excellencies”) after the heads of the two great rabbinic academies at Sura and Pumpeditha. It was there that the great Babylonian Talmud was compiled by the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 115 various Jewish communities throughout the eastern Mediterranean, including Egypt, Cyprus, and Cyrene, revolted against the Roman emperor Trajan. Without exception these revolts were all put down by Roman legions. Finally, when the emperor Hadrian was on the brink of founding the new city of Aelia Capitolina on the site of old Jerusalem, the Jews again revolted in <span>AD<\/span> 132, led by a self-proclaimed messiah, Simeon Bar Koziba, who was called Bar-Kochba (“Son of a Star”) by his followers as an allusion to the messianic passage in Numbers 24:17. Bar-Kochba was aided by the famous rabbinic scholar Akiba. This revolt, though initially successful, was put down by the Romans under Julius Severus in 135. Shortly thereafter, Hadrian issued a decree banning all Jews from the new Aelia Capitolina.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>During this period, the result of generations of rabbinical scholarship bore fruit with the compilation of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. The rabbinic sages consciously saw themselves as the heirs of the ancient Israelite prophets, who in turn were the heirs of the Mosaic law. They distinguished consciously between their own legal interpretations of the Mosaic law (which they called Halakah, or “walking,” i.e., a guide for life), and the commands in the Torah itself (called Mitvah, or “commandment”). The oral law, developed through generations of rabbinic discussion, was finally compiled and written down through the efforts of the patriarch Judah ha-Nasi (c. <span>AD<\/span> 135–220) during the last quarter of the second century <span>AD<\/span> and became known as the Mishnah (“teaching”). This is a topical arrangement of rabbinic discussions on such subjects as the Sabbath, firstfruits, sacrifices, and women. The Mishnah became the basis for further rabbinic discussion in both Palestine and Babylonia. The decisions of sages who flourished after the writing of the Mishnah were compiled about <span>AD<\/span> 450 in Palestine and about 500 in Babylonia. This second stage beyond the Mishnah was called the Gemara (meaning either “completion” or “repetition”). The Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara make up the Babylonian Talmud, while the same Mishnah with the Jerusalem or Palestinian Gemara comprises the Jerusalem Talmud. Yet another type of rabbinic literature is the Midrashim (“interpretations”), which either follow the order of a particular biblical book or consist of homilies on particular biblical texts. The Targums, paraphrastic translations of Scripture into the Aramaic language, finally came to be written down beginning in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>After the destruction of the temple, rabbinic Judaism concentrated on the religious significance of the Torah and elevated scholarship to the central role that it still plays in Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism gradually exerted its influence upon diaspora Judaism under the initial leadership of Rabbi Johanan until a kind of rabbinic orthodoxy emerged during the second century. Christianity was one of the major ideological foes of rabbinic Judaism. In order to purge Jewish Christians from their midst, the rabbis introduced an additional benediction to the eighteen benedictions customarily recited at synagogue services. This 19th benediction was a curse upon the <em>minim<\/em> (Christians and other heretics), which Jewish Christians who attended synagogue services found impossible to recite. The line was firmly drawn between Judaism and Christianity by this device, which was employed late in the first century.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead Sea Scrolls; Essenes; Diaspora of the Jews; First Jewish Revolt; Israel, History of; Jew; Judah, Tribe of; Judaism; Pharisees; Philo, Judaeus; Postexilic Period; Sanhedrin; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDAISM Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 BC) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.” The Period of the Second Temple (515 BC–AD 70) Historical Survey The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 BC on the pa...","summary_en":"JUDAISM Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 BC) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.” The Period of the Second Temple (515 BC–AD 70) Historical Survey The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 BC on the pa...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":11748,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ezekiel","title_en":"Book of Ezekiel","content_ro":"<h3>EZEKIEL, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the temple to his fellow exiles. Settled at Tel-abib, on the canal of Kebar, the thousands of deportees eked out a meager existence. They hoped for a speedy return to Judah and a change for the better in the international situation. Their hope was enflamed by the spirited preaching of false prophets, likened to jackals among the ruins (13:4). They piously said, “The Lord declares . . . ,” but they were actually self-commissioned (v 6). They deceived the people with a message of peace at a time when God’s judgment was about to be poured out on his people (v 10). They had led the people to distrust prophecy to such an extent that a proverb circulated among the people that “the days grow long, and every vision comes to nought” (12:22). Much time had passed since visions of God’s judgment had been given to the people, and nothing could be interpreted as a fulfillment of those visions. Ezekiel was called to serve his community by symbolic acts, visions, and verbal messages in order to convince the people that God’s judgment was imminent (v 23).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandBackground\">Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of the prophet Ezekiel can be understood best against the backdrop of his time. If, as the church father Origen believed, the vague reference “in the thirtieth year” (1:1) marks the prophet’s age at the time of his first vision, Ezekiel was born during the rule of King Josiah of Judah (c. 640–609 <span>BC<\/span>). Josiah was the grandson of King Manasseh, whose sacrilegious acts had brought God’s judgment on the kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 21:10-15).<\/p>\n<p>Though Judah’s political situation was perilous, Josiah led the nation in a radical reformation that began with the finding of the “Book of the Law” (2 Kgs 22) in the year that Ezekiel was born (c. 621 <span>BC<\/span>). Idolatry was done away with and the people turned back to God, but God’s judgment on Judah was unchangeable (23:26-27). Josiah erred in trying to make Judah a kingdom with which other states had to reckon. He was threatened when the Egyptian pharaoh Neco passed through Judah on his way to aid the weakened Assyrian kingdom. Josiah marched to meet the Egyptian forces, but his troops were unable to stand against the Egyptians, and he died in battle (v 29). Egypt took control of Judah, and Pharaoh Neco placed Jehoiakim in power over Jerusalem. Egyptian control did not last long, however, for in 605 <span>BC<\/span> Egypt and Assyria were defeated by Babylonia’s king Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish. The Babylonians then pushed south to Jerusalem, and the first deportation of Judean leaders (among them the prophet Daniel) took place.<\/p>\n<p>Jehoiakim was permitted to continue ruling over Judah as a vassal king of Nebuchadnezzar. But his dealings with Egypt brought the emperor’s wrath down upon him. Before the Babylonians could address the Judean situation, Jehoiakim died and his son Jehoiachin was crowned. When the Babylonian forces arrived at the gates of Jerusalem, Jehoiachin and thousands of the aristocracy were taken to Babylon (2 Kgs 24:10-17). Among those deportees was Ezekiel, then about 25 years old.<\/p>\n<p>Although the book says otherwise, many scholars think that Ezekiel lived and taught in Judah for the duration of the siege and the fall of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>). They conclude this from Ezekiel’s familiarity with idolatry in the temple and his vivid descriptions of Jerusalem’s last days (Ez 8:11). Others believe that Ezekiel ministered both to the exiled community and to the Judeans living in Judah. Neither interpretation does full justice to the claims of the book itself. Ezekiel was exiled in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He was called to bring God’s word to the deportees at Tel-abib; he was granted a vision of the horrible practices in the temple court; and he was familiar with Jerusalem and Judah from having lived there and from reports on affairs in Jerusalem coming to the exiles through messengers. Jeremiah, Ezekiel’s contemporary, was prophesying in Jerusalem, but there is no evidence that Jeremiah and Ezekiel knew of each other’s ministry. If Ezekiel had brought God’s word to Jerusalem during the siege, some reference to Jeremiah might appear in his writings. If Jeremiah was supported by Ezekiel’s ministry in Jerusalem, he probably would have included a positive word for his colleague in his book. The book of Ezekiel plainly says that Ezekiel lived and preached in exile (see 1:1-3; 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The prophecy of Ezekiel is easily outlined by subject matter and chronology. The chronology of the period permits a division before and after 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Jerusalem). Chapters 1–24 cover the pre-586 ministry of Ezekiel, whereas chapters 33–48 represent his post-586 ministry. Chapters 25–32 (oracles against the foreign nations) function as a transition between the book’s two major divisions.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s outline according to subject matter divides into four parts: Ezekiel’s call (1:1–3:21); prophecies of judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27); oracles against the nations (25:1–32:32); and proclamation of hope (33:1–48:35).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Call (1:1–3:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The prophet’s call in one sense was similar to that of Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah received his mission in a vision of God’s glory in the temple (Is 6). Jeremiah was called unexpectedly in his youth, and received signs that solemnly set forth the nature of his mission (Jer 1:11-15). The call of Ezekiel combined those two elements. Revelation of God’s glory to the prophet at the same time revealed the nature of the prophet’s mission. Ezekiel’s call contained a full description of God’s glory. Isaiah briefly stated that he saw the Lord enthroned in the temple, and he concentrated on the seraphim representing and magnifying God’s glory. Ezekiel elaborated on the revelation of the Lord’s glory as well as on the ministering angels who went before the Lord as part of his royal entourage. The vision of God’s glory, though difficult to understand, is the key to the book of Ezekiel.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel, as a priest, was concerned about the future of the temple. That sacred place had been ordained by God as his home among his people. The glory, presence, and holiness of God were symbolized in the temple (see 1 Kgs 8:10-11). In exile Ezekiel could not serve his people as a priest, for they were far from Jerusalem, the city God had chosen. Against all expectations the Lord revealed himself to Ezekiel in the land of Babylon. In calling Ezekiel to a prophetic ministry, God assured his servant that he had not forsaken his people, even though they had been banished from the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet’s vision began with a storm. As a large cloud approached from the north, Ezekiel saw a brightness surrounding the cloud, four creatures, and four wheels. The combination of creatures and wheels suggests that the Lord appeared in a chariot. God’s chariot is a familiar OT representation of his coming in judgment (see Is 66:15-16). The wheels within wheels and the position of the four living creatures may signify God’s total control over the whole earth, so he could move his “chariot of judgment” in any direction. It is also possible that the living creatures with their four faces, and the wheels full of eyes, may be separate symbols showing that God sees all that happens and thereby knows the plight of the exiles. In the vision the prophet’s attention was drawn to a throne above the heads of the creatures. On the throne was “the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1:28). In his vision of God’s coming in judgment, Ezekiel received his call to the prophetic ministry: “Son of man, I send you to the people of Israel, to a nation of rebels who have rebelled against me” (2:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). During a dark hour of Israel’s history, Ezekiel had to prophesy, rebuke his fellow exiles (3:11), and be responsible as a watchman over the house of Israel (3:17; cf. 33:1-9). Symbolic of his mission was a scroll filled with lamentations and woe (2:9-10), which when eaten became sweet as honey (3:1-3). Difficult as the mission was, God’s presence and the certain fulfillment of the prophecies sweetened Ezekiel’s task. Such encouragement was intended to take away any fear of the rebellious Israelites (2:6-7). Instead of being elated with his mission, however, Ezekiel became despondent.<\/p>\n<p>A week later, the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel to remind him of his important role as a watchman (3:16-17). Ezekiel became responsible for Israel as a nation, not just for individuals. His witness to Israel had the express aim of national repentance (vv 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was confined to his house by God (3:24-25). The house ministry was to be carried on only with those Israelites who sought God’s will, for the Lord had abandoned those who continued in their apostasy. The prophetic word would not help the apostates (v 26). The principle of Ezekiel’s ministry is found in 3:27: “Whenever I give you a message, I will loosen your tongue and let you speak. Then you will say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span> says!’ Some of them will listen, but some will ignore you, for they are rebels” (<span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 11:15; 13:43).<\/p>\n<h5>Prophecies of Judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolism figures prominently in Ezekiel’s writing. His priestly background and preparation probably suited him to receive and communicate God’s word in symbolic acts and speech. Chapters 4 and 5 contain four symbolic acts: (1) Jerusalem’s siege is portrayed on a brick (Ez 4:1-3); (2) Israel’s iniquity is represented by Ezekiel’s lying on his sides (vv 4-8); (3) Jerusalem’s grief and horror in the last days of the siege are represented by Ezekiel’s food and drink (vv 9-17); (4) Jerusalem’s fate is represented by the prophet’s hair being cut off (5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s instructions were further illuminated by God’s explanation of Israel’s apostasy (5:6-7) and his judgment on Israel (vv 8-12). The judgment will last until the Israelites admit that in covenant faithfulness their Lord has inflicted righteous judgment on them (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>God would direct his judgment first against the people and the city of Jerusalem. Next in line were the mountains of Israel (ch 6) and the land (ch 7). God’s wrath included the cities and cultic sites in the hill country of Judah, leaving no protection for the people (6:3-6). Abominations that were practiced throughout the land caused God’s judgment to fall on the land as well as on the people (7:2-3, 10-11, 23). But because God is righteous, he judged the people according to their ways of life, desiring that they would once more acknowledge him as their God (7:27).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet then (chs 8–11) focused on the abominations practiced in Jerusalem, particularly idolatry in the temple courts, which caused the judgment announced in chapters 1–7. An idol had been erected in the inner court (8:3-5). By the wall of the court, elders of the city were paying homage to the idols that surrounded the court (vv 11-12). Closer to the temple, women were weeping for the god Tammuz (v 14), and men were worshiping the sun (v 16). In preparation for the ultimate judgment on the land, the prophet placed a mark on the foreheads of the few faithful Israelites so that they would survive (9:4-6). Then (ch 10), the glory of God, which had filled the temple from the time of Solomon, gradually left: “Then the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> went up from the city and stopped above the mountain to the east” (11:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people, now without divine protection, were being handed over to the Babylonians (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>The message of doom for Jerusalem contains four elements of hope: restoration of the people (11:17), restoration of the land (v 17), purification of the people (v 18), and renewed fellowship between God and his people (vv 19-20). The prophet develops those four themes in chapters 33–48.<\/p>\n<p>The visions of chapters 10 and 11 made clear that when God removed his presence from Jerusalem, the exile was approaching. Those who were already in Babylon were unwilling to believe that such an extensive devastation of Jerusalem would happen or that the people would all be exiled and the land become desolate.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel acted out the certainty of God’s word of judgment by packing his bags and showing the baggage to his fellow exiles. First, he placed the bags in the courtyard outside his modest home. Next, he went out by making a hole through the wall. Finally, the prophet walked about the settlement with his bags in full view. Skeptical observers did not understand Ezekiel and probably thought he was crazy. The believers who saw him understood. His strange actions dramatized how the king’s aides would do all they could to help King Zedekiah escape just before the fall of Jerusalem. Second Kings 25 tells how the king and his soldiers left Jerusalem for the wilderness, to be overtaken by the Babylonians at Jericho and brought before Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. As a captive, Zedekiah witnessed the murder of his sons; then his eyes were put out, and he was sent into exile with the other Judeans (cf. Ez 12:13). The prophet’s explanation concluded with a word of comfort. Because of his covenant with Abraham, God promised not to destroy the people completely. A remnant who overcame the sword, famine, and pestilence would live to tell the story of God’s judgment (vv 15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel further illustrated the nation’s plight by eating as though full of fear, depicting the great trauma that all of Judah’s inhabitants would soon undergo.<\/p>\n<p>Both symbolic acts, packing his belongings and eating, emphasized the truthfulness of God’s word. The people needed to face the nature of their God: He is magnificent, and when he speaks, his words are powerful and come to pass. Thus, the devastation of the land and the people’s exile were a fulfillment of God’s word through the prophets. The judgment was meant to produce a recognition of the Lord, repentance, and a return to God. Some in Judah doubted the efficacy of God’s prophecies, saying, “Time passes, making a liar of every prophet” (12:22). Others thought God’s word would come true in the distant future (v 27). The prevailing attitude of distrust in God’s word had been stimulated by the popular preaching of false prophets (ch 13). Never commissioned by the Lord, they deceived God’s people by lying and misdirecting them with messages of peace (vv 8-10). Wickedness, lying, and deceit were encouraged among the people by such false prophets (v 22). The magnitude of their sin and their great responsibility for Judah’s fall would be matched by the Lord’s heavy judgment. Yet God would save his people from such evil and will prepare a righteous nation with whom to maintain his covenant (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>The certainty of the judgment has been connected with the truthfulness of God’s word. Ezekiel’s difficult task of affirming the doom of Jerusalem to stubborn hearers was intensified by the people’s idolatry. Their whole way of life denied the existence of God. They practiced idolatry in their worship, and they had set up idols in their hearts (14:3). Before the covenant with God could be restored, they had to be purified from their idolatry. Even so, repentance would not guarantee immunity from judgment. Sword, famine, wild beasts, and plagues would ravage the population (v 21). After the execution of his judgment, God would take back those survivors who had turned to him for mercy. God would surely accomplish all that he intended for his people’s good (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 15–17 Ezekiel uses three parables to set forth the apostasy, present uselessness, and judgment of Israel. Jerusalem and Judah are compared to a piece of charred wood, an adulterous woman, and a vine.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 15 reviews Jerusalem’s case. Jerusalem is compared to a piece of wood, both ends of which have been charred with fire, so that the wood is of no value. As the whole piece of wood is burned instead of being saved, so Jerusalem would undergo complete devastation (15:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 16 presents God’s case against Jerusalem from a different perspective, stressing his care for Jerusalem in the past. The beginnings of her history are compared to the birth of a female child, left abandoned by her mother (16:3-5). God adopted the child and washed and clothed her (vv 6-7). He made a covenant with her (v 8), making her his own possession. He generously gave her all the fine things of life (vv 9-13). In the height of her development, Jerusalem’s fame spread to the nations (v 14). Her self-reliance made her a spiritual prostitute as she took up the religious practices and way of life of the nations (vv 15-34). The cities of Sodom (Gn 19) and Samaria (2 Kgs 17:6), known for their immorality, are called Jerusalem’s sisters (Ez 16:46). They had been judged by God, but the corruption of those cities was little compared to the lewdness of Jerusalem (vv 48-51). Thus, Jerusalem also would surely fall and become desolate. Yet Ezekiel anticipates the judgment’s final outcome; Jerusalem will be restored to covenantal blessing (vv 62-63) after her repentance.<\/p>\n<p>The third parable (ch 17) focuses on God’s sovereignty over political developments. Assyria was no longer a power to be reckoned with. Babylon and Egypt both exercised dominion, although the balance of power was veering in favor of Babylon. Their extension of power is likened to an eagle. Nebuchadnezzar, pictured as “a great eagle with broad wings full of many-colored feathers,” took control over the affairs of Judah by removing Jehoiachin, “the highest branch of a cedar tree,” from office and by exiling him with young leaders of the Judean state (17:3-4). Ezekiel was among them. Nebuchadnezzar let the Judeans control their own affairs under Zedekiah but expected them to be subject to Babylon and not to any other power. But Judah (likened to a vine) tried to ally itself with Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt, “another great eagle with broad wings and full plumage” (v 7), against Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah’s folly in turning to Egypt would cause Nebuchadnezzar to pull up the vine by its roots and make it wither (vv 9-10). In explaining the parable, God told the exiles that Judah’s fall was a result of its unfaithfulness to King Nebuchadnezzar, to whom Judah owed allegiance by covenant (vv 13-18). Judah’s unfaithfulness thus extended to all of its relationships: religious, cultural, and political. After the exile, God promised, he would restore his people to their land under a Messiah, “a tender shoot” (v 22). The messianic rule is signified by the young twig, which when planted in the land will become a magnificent cedar, giving shade and protection to the birds. Chapter 17 is an inspiring affirmation of the sovereignty of God in human affairs (“All the trees will know that it is I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, who cuts down the tall tree and helps the short tree to grow tall. It is I who makes the green tree wither and gives new life to the dead tree”—17:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 18–22 contain Ezekiel’s oracles to Judah, its leaders, and the exiles. First, he enunciates God’s standard of righteousness: “The person who sins will be the one who dies” (18:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people are charging God with injustice, for they believe themselves to be under God’s judgment for the sins of their ancestors (vv 25-29). Although the Ten Commandments do say that God may punish “the sins of their parents to the third and the fourth generations” (Ex 20:5, <span>nlt<\/span>), the prophet vindicates God’s justice, telling the people that they are not being punished merely for their ancestors’ sin. Each person must be directly accountable to God; the sinner will die in wickedness, and the righteous will live by righteousness. A life of faithfulness to God’s moral and civil law will be rewarded (Ez 18:5-9). Even if one’s father was a sinner, the father’s sin is not transferable (vv 14-18). God is ready to forgive any sinner who repents (v 27). The prophet’s vindication of God’s justice becomes a call to repentance. The sinners in Judah and in exile were thus warned of the consequences of their evil, and were exhorted to return to their God and his standard of right and wrong (vv 31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 19 contains two parables in the form of a lamentation. The first portrays a lioness and her two cubs. The lioness is Hamutal, the wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31), who bore two sons: Jehoahaz and Zedekiah. Jehoahaz is referred to in Ezekiel 19:3-4 as a cub who grew up and was taken to Egypt (by Pharaoh Neco in 608 <span>BC<\/span>; see 2 Kgs 23:31-34). Zedekiah succeeded to the throne ten years later. In the lamentation the prophet imaginatively represents Zedekiah as a young cub who is ultimately taken to Babylon as a rebellious ruler (Ez 19:7-9). The second parable changes the imagery to a vine, representing Israel (v 10). In its early days God blessed Israel with strong rulers, but now the vine was wilting as Zedekiah irresponsibly led Judah to its last days. Ezekiel’s lamentation stresses the lack of a good candidate for the throne and the lack of life in the vine (vv 13-14).<\/p>\n<p>In chapter 20 the prophet concludes God’s argument against his people. He reviews the history of Israel’s past, starting with God’s self-revelation in Egypt (20:5-6). He took to himself a stubborn nation, tied to idolatry (v 8) and prone to apostasy (vv 13, 21). Israel wanted to be one of the great nations (v 32) instead of a sanctified people (v 12). As a result of its spiritual hardness, Israel is dispersed to live among the nations (v 35). Yet God had a solemn covenant with Israel, made by oath to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. On the basis of that covenant, God will reach out with compassion to those who repent of their sinful ways (vv 37-44). In Israel’s judgment and restoration the nations will see the holiness of God, which does not tolerate unfaithfulness in Israel (v 41).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s prophecies alternate between God’s judgment on Israel’s sin and his restoration of Israel, spanning the bridge between Israel’s past and future. In view of the people’s doubts of the coming judgment on Jerusalem, he stresses the necessity of judgment and the need for repentance. Still, the future restoration of a remnant is touched upon here and there as the counterpart of his message of judgment. After announcing the fall of Jerusalem, the prophet shifts from a message of judgment to one of hope.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet returns to the proclamation of judgment in four oracles (20:45–21:32). He speaks against the Negev Desert area (20:45-49), Jerusalem and the land of Israel (21:2-17, 20-27), and against the Ammonites (vv 28-32). God permitted the sword of Nebuchadnezzar to be his instrument of judgment upon the Judeans (v 19). He would see to the judgment on the Ammonites. The Judeans would recover their previous glory, but the memory of the Ammonites would perish (vv 27, 32). The oracle against the Ammonites anticipates a larger treatise on Israel’s other neighbors: Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt (chs 25–29).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 22–24 contain a renewed series of indictments against Jerusalem. Jerusalem’s religious and civil leadership (the prophets, priests, and princes) are corrupt, and the people have followed their example (22:25-30). The parable of the two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, is a variation of the parable of adulterous Jerusalem (ch 23; cf. ch 16). It differs in that the comparison drawn between Jerusalem, soon to be exiled, and Samaria, already in exile, is more explicit in the parable of Oholah and Oholibah. In chapter 16 Jerusalem was charged with greater sins than Sodom and Samaria, but was promised restoration. Only the adulterous nature of the two sisters and God’s judgment on them is emphasized in chapter 23, with no word of restoration. This parable is a fitting introduction to that of the boiling pot (ch 24), in which Jerusalem is compared to a rusty pot boiling with water. The Jerusalemites, likened to pieces of meat in the boiling pot, will die in the city. The parable was pronounced on the starting day of Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem. Thus, the exiles were divinely forewarned of God’s intent to destroy the temple (24:21) and were prepared for messengers bringing the bad news of Jerusalem’s fall.<\/p>\n<p>Those oracles and parables conclude the first division of the book. Ezekiel has stated God’s case against the rebellious house of Judah in many ways. His metaphors have likened Judah to a burnt piece of wood, to an uprooted vine, to a baby who grew up to be an adulteress, and to Oholibah, the adulterous woman. He has countered arguments against the fulfillment of God’s word and against the justice of God. He has reassured the exiles that God will not leave the righteous and that the future of Israel begins with a righteous remnant. The pendulum of Ezekiel’s writing has swung from judgment to restoration, while the clock was bringing Judah closer to the hour of its fall.<\/p>\n<h5>Oracles against the Nations (25:1–32:32)<\/h5>\n<p>Ammon, Moab, and Edom were Israel’s neighbors to the east. Because they were ethnically related to Israel, they were not attacked by the Israelites on their march to the Promised Land. Ammon and Moab were descendants of Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and the Edomites descended from Esau, the brother of Jacob. Although God forbade war with them, relations between Israel and its eastern neighbors were always tense. Israel had been overrun by the Ammonites for a time, and Israel was never successful in controlling the Edomites’ competitive trade relations. Those neighboring nations joined the Babylonian attack against Jerusalem and rejoiced when Jerusalem fell and the temple was devastated (Ez 25:3-12). They were ready to take over and loot Judah’s cities, and to instigate trouble in a time when Jerusalem was distressed. Therefore, says Ezekiel, God’s judgment will also extend to Ammon, Moab, and Edom (vv 4-14).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines had been Israel’s enemy to the southwest. During the period of the judges and the united monarchy, the Philistines had controlled much of Israel’s territory. King David successfully limited the Philistine threat by confining them to their own territory. But in Ezekiel’s day they were still considered Israel’s “everlasting” enemy (25:15), possibly intensified by Philistine support of the Babylonian invasion of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>The city of Tyre had received reports of the overthrow of Jerusalem and was ready to exploit the opportunity for its own advantage (26:2). Tyre’s trade position was unrivaled; its ships crossed the seas to exchange goods with many distant lands (Ez 27). But Tyre would soon be broken by the Babylonians, its wealth dried up with the destruction of the fleet and the murder of its sailors (27:26).<\/p>\n<p>The prince of Tyre is singled out in chapter 28, but verse 12 refers to the “king” of Tyre. Interpreters disagree whether they are one person or two. Those who distinguish between the two understand the prince of Tyre to be the ruler of that city, but they consider the “king” of Tyre to represent Satan (28:13-15). The Garden of Eden with all its splendor is an appropriate setting for the original glory of an angelic Satan before his fall. But there is no reason within the context to distinguish between the prince and the king of Tyre. Each is said to have exalted himself, and both took authority over men as if they were gods and enjoyed all the splendor and royalty that belong to God. And both prince and king fall from their high position. The passage is a magnificent example of Ezekiel’s literary ability. He draws a glorious picture of the Garden of Eden, reworking the same theme as he depicts the glory and fall of the king of Tyre. Ezekiel presents him as a cherub, in accordance with the local belief that the king was divine. He wore the finest clothing, with nine kinds of precious stones (v 13). Though God had elevated him to the royal throne (vv 13-14), the king’s heart turned to materialism and to religious and judicial corruption (vv 16-18). In a sense the king (prince) represents the people of Tyre. They were all guilty of corruption, injustice, and violence. If God judged his covenant people for their perversion of justice and for their sins, his judgment would surely come also on the city of Tyre (vv 18-19). When the Babylonians marched on Tyre, they laboriously built a jetty from the mainland to the city. At the same time Tyrian ships loaded with goods and treasures sailed out across the Mediterranean, so that when Nebuchadnezzar’s troops finally breached the walls, little loot could be taken (29:18).<\/p>\n<p>The city of Sidon also cheered Jerusalem’s destruction. Sidon was a port city in Phoenicia, to the north of Tyre. By pestilence and war, the inhabitants of Sidon would learn the justice of Israel’s God.<\/p>\n<p>Six nations (Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, and Sidon) scorned Israel at the fall of Jerusalem. Because God had invested his holiness in the temple of Jerusalem and in his people, the temple’s destruction and the people’s exile signified to the nations that Israel’s God was impotent. They did not realize that the reason for Israel’s fate was God’s intolerance of his people’s sin. God’s holiness required the punishment of sin, and it also required vindication for his name (28:22-23). God was still concerned for his people, that Israel might know he had removed the scorn of their neighbors (v 24). In the restoration of Israel the Lord would further manifest his holiness before the nations. Israel would receive back the land, vineyards, and houses, and would enjoy the bounty of the Lord in peace (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>Egypt had convinced the people of Israel and Judah that with its help the Assyrians and the Babylonians could not stand their ground in Palestine. In 722 <span>BC<\/span> the Assyrian troops took the northern capital of Samaria, and in 586 the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem, while Egypt remained passive. The Egyptians had desired control over Palestine for economic reasons, but not at the expense of their own welfare. Egypt, too, would lose its leadership under God’s judgment (29:9-16). Reduced to dependence on foreign powers, Egypt would no longer be a stumbling block for Israel. First, Babylonia was permitted to break Egypt’s power (23:1–32:21); later, the Persians, Greeks, and Romans would incorporate Egypt as a province. The fall of Egypt coincided with the fall of several great and small kingdoms: Assyria (32:22-23), Elam (vv 24-25), Meshech and Tubal (vv 26-28), Edom (v 29), and Sidon (v 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Proclamation of Hope (33:1–48:35)<\/h5>\n<p>After the visions of God’s judgment on the surrounding nations, Ezekiel returns to the future hope of Israel. In the first major section of his book he dealt with the reasons for Judah’s exile and the destruction of the temple, alluding often to the future of Israel. But the prophet’s organization of his material included, between prophecies of Israel’s judgment and restoration, the oracles of God’s judgment on Israel’s neighbors who had encouraged and rejoiced in its fall. Throughout its history Israel had allowed foreign nations to influence its religion, culture, and form of government. The reduction of their powers meant Israel, restored to the Promised Land, would be more free for faithfulness to God. Before taking up the theme of the restoration, Ezekiel reviews the emphases of chapters 1–24: (1) He was called to be a watchman over Israel (33:1-9; cf. 1:1–3:21). (2) Israel had sinned against the Lord and had to receive a righteous judgment (33:10). (3) Jerusalem was to be taken by the Babylonians (v 21). (4) Israel’s repentance is necessary for restoration (vv 11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Thus far, his ministry had not met with success. The exiles who had heard his messages were full of appreciation for Ezekiel’s rhetorical and literary abilities (33:32). They readily accepted Ezekiel as a watchman who warned the people of the impending catastrophe at Jerusalem, and they may have admitted that their sin was the reason for God’s judgment on Israel and Jerusalem. But they were slow in applying the prophetic word to their own lives. God was ready to forgive their sins if they repented, acknowledged him, and demonstrated their renewed spirit by practicing the law of God (v 32). Now that the news of Jerusalem had been reported to the exiles (v 21), the necessity for the people to act responsibly was even more urgent. The Lord had demonstrated that Ezekiel was a true prophet (v 33).<\/p>\n<p>The success of Ezekiel’s ministry was not measured in numbers. He faithfully declared the word of God in word, sign, and parable. The exiles had followed the false hopes proclaimed by false “shepherds” who had fattened themselves at the expense of the flock (34:2-3). They did not take care of those in need (v 4), and they allowed the flock to be scattered (vv 5-6). God promised his people that he would be the faithful shepherd, bring the sheep together, feed them, and care for them (34:11-15; cf. Ps 23). God would also distinguish between the sheep and the goats, to find out whose hearts were right with him, so that the true sheep could be restored to God’s flock (Ez 34:20-22). God’s promise included the restoration of the land and the restoration of the divinely appointed Davidic dynasty (v 24). The renewed fellowship between the Lord and Israel under the messianic ruler would be sealed with a new covenant, the “covenant of peace.” That covenant assured the people of God’s blessing on their labor, bringing them abundant harvests (vv 26-27). The people would not be forced to fight against nature in their pursuits (vv 25-28). They would not have to struggle against other peoples who might try to share in their blessings by force (vv 27-29). The prophetic vision telescoped the events of the restoration of Israel after the exile, the coming of Jesus the Messiah (cf. Jn 10), and the full restoration of the sin-cursed world.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 34 is the key to the messages of restoration. The emphases include the outworking of the frequently repeated verse “They will truly be my people, and I will be their God” (11:20; cf. 34:30; 36:28). The most significant aspects of the restoration theme include: (1) God’s gracious restoration of his people to covenant blessing (36:20-36; 37:23-26; 39:25); (2) God’s restoration of the nation of Israel to the land (36:1-15, 24; 37:14-23; 39:27); (3) God’s new covenant, giving his Spirit to his people (36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29), and his blessing on his people (36:8-12, 29-38; 39:9-10, 26), assuring them of victory over their enemies (35:1-15; 36:36; 37:28; 38:1–39:24); (4) God’s appointment of a Davidic king, the Messiah, over his people (37:24-25); and (5) God’s temple restored among his people (37:26-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The People of God<\/h6>\n<p>The rejection of the exiles did not last forever. Based on the Abrahamic covenant, the Lord promised to bless the faithful remnant and to make of them a new people. The imagery of a valley of dry bones is particularly fitting. The dry bones represent God’s people without hope (37:11). Ezekiel proclaims to them the good news that God will renew and restore them (v 12). The Lord’s purpose for his people is that all the nations may honor his holy name through his people (39:7, 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The Land<\/h6>\n<p>The promise also extends to the land, originally given to Abraham and his descendants. The Abrahamic covenant included a messianic element, for through the family of Abraham living in the Promised Land all nations would receive God’s blessing (Gn 12:3). In a vision Ezekiel saw the boundaries and described the division of the land (Ez 47–48). The royal city of Jerusalem is the central symbol of God’s presence among his people; its name will be “The Lord is there” (48:8-35).<\/p>\n<h6>The New Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Abrahamic covenant is renewed, a gracious covenant that expresses the restored relationship. “Covenant of peace” fittingly describes its nature and benefits. The restless people of God are promised rest from their searching, their enemies, and their toil. The change in relationship is further emphasized by God’s sending of his Spirit, who will add a new dimension to the lifestyle of his people. Obedience to God will no longer be constrained, for God’s Spirit helps his people to do his will. A new heart, controlled by the Spirit of God, is given to the Lord’s people (36:26-27). The presence of the Spirit also signifies a new life for the people (37:14; see Jn 3:8, 16; Acts 2:38; Rom 8:2-4, 15).<\/p>\n<h6>The Messiah<\/h6>\n<p>The OT hope of a messianic king is crystallized in Ezekiel’s message. His rule will be everlasting (Ez 37:25), over all God’s people who have new hearts (vv 15-25).<\/p>\n<h6>The Temple<\/h6>\n<p>As a priest, Ezekiel remained keenly interested in the temple, priesthood, sacrificial regulations, and festivals. A large section of the prophecy’s last division describes the temple’s revived worship (40:1–46:24). His vision of the glory of God, so important in the messages of God’s judgment on Jerusalem (chs 1, 10–11), now assures the remnant that God did not forsake his people (43:2-5). He will dwell among them, for the temple is a symbol of God’s presence (37:27). Some interpreters believe that the temple, with its ritual as described in Ezekiel 40–46, will be restored in the messianic era before the last judgment. Others believe the promises about the temple provide a positive symbolic answer to Ezekiel’s greatest concern: whether God will return to be with his people (48:35; see Jn 2:21; Rv 21:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are various interpretations of chapters 34–48. As a watchman to Israel, Ezekiel had a message for the exiled Jewish community. Thus the prophecy’s fulfillment must have begun with the decree of Cyrus I (538 <span>BC<\/span>) permitting the Jews to return to their land (Ezr 1:1-3). Two rival schools of interpretation exist on how the prophecy is fulfilled beyond Israel’s restoration to the land. Those who interpret Israel as simply the nation view the modern return of Jewish people to the land of Israel as a continuation of God’s prophetic promise. They believe that God’s plan for Israel is being fulfilled along with, and in addition to, his plan for the Christian church. The fulfillment of those prophecies will be inaugurated by the coming of the messianic king, who will give earthly peace to the Jewish people. The temple worship (Ez 40–48) will be restored in some way during the period of the messianic kingdom. The church will enjoy a small share in all the events centered on the Jews. The promises of Ezekiel’s vision are thus limited to the nation of Israel and must be fulfilled before the coming of a new heaven and earth.<\/p>\n<p>Other interpreters believe that Ezekiel wrote for the benefit of spiritual descendants of Abraham who believe, as Abraham did, in God’s promises (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:11-13; Gal 3:6-9, 29). All who have faith like Abraham, whether Jews or Gentiles, are regarded as Abraham’s offspring (Gal 3:28-29). Ezekiel’s message thus would include all of God’s gracious work among Christian Gentiles, who have become the recipients of God’s promises and benefits. It is possible, on the basis of 1 Peter 1:10-11, to interpret Ezekiel’s language as a prophetic expression of how God’s grace would come to all those who become reconciled to God through faith in the gospel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Ezekiel (Person); Prophecy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EZEKIEL, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the temple to his fellow exiles. Settled at Tel-abib, on the canal of Kebar, the thousands of deportees eked out a meager existence. They hoped for a speedy return to Judah and a change for the better in the international situation. Their hope was enflamed by the spirited preaching of false prophets, likened to jackals among the ruins (13:4). They piously said, “The Lord declares . . . ,” but they were actually self-commissioned (v 6). They deceived the people with a message of peace at a time when God’s judgment was about to be poured out on his people (v 10). They had led the people to distrust prophecy to such an extent that a proverb circulated among the people that “the days grow long, and every vision comes to nought” (12:22). Much time had passed since visions of God’s judgment had been given to the people, and nothing could be interpreted as a fulfillment of those visions. Ezekiel was called to serve his community by symbolic acts, visions, and verbal messages in order to convince the people that God’s judgment was imminent (v 23).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandBackground\">Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of the prophet Ezekiel can be understood best against the backdrop of his time. If, as the church father Origen believed, the vague reference “in the thirtieth year” (1:1) marks the prophet’s age at the time of his first vision, Ezekiel was born during the rule of King Josiah of Judah (c. 640–609 <span>BC<\/span>). Josiah was the grandson of King Manasseh, whose sacrilegious acts had brought God’s judgment on the kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 21:10-15).<\/p>\n<p>Though Judah’s political situation was perilous, Josiah led the nation in a radical reformation that began with the finding of the “Book of the Law” (2 Kgs 22) in the year that Ezekiel was born (c. 621 <span>BC<\/span>). Idolatry was done away with and the people turned back to God, but God’s judgment on Judah was unchangeable (23:26-27). Josiah erred in trying to make Judah a kingdom with which other states had to reckon. He was threatened when the Egyptian pharaoh Neco passed through Judah on his way to aid the weakened Assyrian kingdom. Josiah marched to meet the Egyptian forces, but his troops were unable to stand against the Egyptians, and he died in battle (v 29). Egypt took control of Judah, and Pharaoh Neco placed Jehoiakim in power over Jerusalem. Egyptian control did not last long, however, for in 605 <span>BC<\/span> Egypt and Assyria were defeated by Babylonia’s king Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish. The Babylonians then pushed south to Jerusalem, and the first deportation of Judean leaders (among them the prophet Daniel) took place.<\/p>\n<p>Jehoiakim was permitted to continue ruling over Judah as a vassal king of Nebuchadnezzar. But his dealings with Egypt brought the emperor’s wrath down upon him. Before the Babylonians could address the Judean situation, Jehoiakim died and his son Jehoiachin was crowned. When the Babylonian forces arrived at the gates of Jerusalem, Jehoiachin and thousands of the aristocracy were taken to Babylon (2 Kgs 24:10-17). Among those deportees was Ezekiel, then about 25 years old.<\/p>\n<p>Although the book says otherwise, many scholars think that Ezekiel lived and taught in Judah for the duration of the siege and the fall of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>). They conclude this from Ezekiel’s familiarity with idolatry in the temple and his vivid descriptions of Jerusalem’s last days (Ez 8:11). Others believe that Ezekiel ministered both to the exiled community and to the Judeans living in Judah. Neither interpretation does full justice to the claims of the book itself. Ezekiel was exiled in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He was called to bring God’s word to the deportees at Tel-abib; he was granted a vision of the horrible practices in the temple court; and he was familiar with Jerusalem and Judah from having lived there and from reports on affairs in Jerusalem coming to the exiles through messengers. Jeremiah, Ezekiel’s contemporary, was prophesying in Jerusalem, but there is no evidence that Jeremiah and Ezekiel knew of each other’s ministry. If Ezekiel had brought God’s word to Jerusalem during the siege, some reference to Jeremiah might appear in his writings. If Jeremiah was supported by Ezekiel’s ministry in Jerusalem, he probably would have included a positive word for his colleague in his book. The book of Ezekiel plainly says that Ezekiel lived and preached in exile (see 1:1-3; 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The prophecy of Ezekiel is easily outlined by subject matter and chronology. The chronology of the period permits a division before and after 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Jerusalem). Chapters 1–24 cover the pre-586 ministry of Ezekiel, whereas chapters 33–48 represent his post-586 ministry. Chapters 25–32 (oracles against the foreign nations) function as a transition between the book’s two major divisions.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s outline according to subject matter divides into four parts: Ezekiel’s call (1:1–3:21); prophecies of judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27); oracles against the nations (25:1–32:32); and proclamation of hope (33:1–48:35).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Call (1:1–3:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The prophet’s call in one sense was similar to that of Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah received his mission in a vision of God’s glory in the temple (Is 6). Jeremiah was called unexpectedly in his youth, and received signs that solemnly set forth the nature of his mission (Jer 1:11-15). The call of Ezekiel combined those two elements. Revelation of God’s glory to the prophet at the same time revealed the nature of the prophet’s mission. Ezekiel’s call contained a full description of God’s glory. Isaiah briefly stated that he saw the Lord enthroned in the temple, and he concentrated on the seraphim representing and magnifying God’s glory. Ezekiel elaborated on the revelation of the Lord’s glory as well as on the ministering angels who went before the Lord as part of his royal entourage. The vision of God’s glory, though difficult to understand, is the key to the book of Ezekiel.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel, as a priest, was concerned about the future of the temple. That sacred place had been ordained by God as his home among his people. The glory, presence, and holiness of God were symbolized in the temple (see 1 Kgs 8:10-11). In exile Ezekiel could not serve his people as a priest, for they were far from Jerusalem, the city God had chosen. Against all expectations the Lord revealed himself to Ezekiel in the land of Babylon. In calling Ezekiel to a prophetic ministry, God assured his servant that he had not forsaken his people, even though they had been banished from the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet’s vision began with a storm. As a large cloud approached from the north, Ezekiel saw a brightness surrounding the cloud, four creatures, and four wheels. The combination of creatures and wheels suggests that the Lord appeared in a chariot. God’s chariot is a familiar OT representation of his coming in judgment (see Is 66:15-16). The wheels within wheels and the position of the four living creatures may signify God’s total control over the whole earth, so he could move his “chariot of judgment” in any direction. It is also possible that the living creatures with their four faces, and the wheels full of eyes, may be separate symbols showing that God sees all that happens and thereby knows the plight of the exiles. In the vision the prophet’s attention was drawn to a throne above the heads of the creatures. On the throne was “the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1:28). In his vision of God’s coming in judgment, Ezekiel received his call to the prophetic ministry: “Son of man, I send you to the people of Israel, to a nation of rebels who have rebelled against me” (2:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). During a dark hour of Israel’s history, Ezekiel had to prophesy, rebuke his fellow exiles (3:11), and be responsible as a watchman over the house of Israel (3:17; cf. 33:1-9). Symbolic of his mission was a scroll filled with lamentations and woe (2:9-10), which when eaten became sweet as honey (3:1-3). Difficult as the mission was, God’s presence and the certain fulfillment of the prophecies sweetened Ezekiel’s task. Such encouragement was intended to take away any fear of the rebellious Israelites (2:6-7). Instead of being elated with his mission, however, Ezekiel became despondent.<\/p>\n<p>A week later, the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel to remind him of his important role as a watchman (3:16-17). Ezekiel became responsible for Israel as a nation, not just for individuals. His witness to Israel had the express aim of national repentance (vv 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was confined to his house by God (3:24-25). The house ministry was to be carried on only with those Israelites who sought God’s will, for the Lord had abandoned those who continued in their apostasy. The prophetic word would not help the apostates (v 26). The principle of Ezekiel’s ministry is found in 3:27: “Whenever I give you a message, I will loosen your tongue and let you speak. Then you will say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span> says!’ Some of them will listen, but some will ignore you, for they are rebels” (<span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 11:15; 13:43).<\/p>\n<h5>Prophecies of Judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolism figures prominently in Ezekiel’s writing. His priestly background and preparation probably suited him to receive and communicate God’s word in symbolic acts and speech. Chapters 4 and 5 contain four symbolic acts: (1) Jerusalem’s siege is portrayed on a brick (Ez 4:1-3); (2) Israel’s iniquity is represented by Ezekiel’s lying on his sides (vv 4-8); (3) Jerusalem’s grief and horror in the last days of the siege are represented by Ezekiel’s food and drink (vv 9-17); (4) Jerusalem’s fate is represented by the prophet’s hair being cut off (5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s instructions were further illuminated by God’s explanation of Israel’s apostasy (5:6-7) and his judgment on Israel (vv 8-12). The judgment will last until the Israelites admit that in covenant faithfulness their Lord has inflicted righteous judgment on them (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>God would direct his judgment first against the people and the city of Jerusalem. Next in line were the mountains of Israel (ch 6) and the land (ch 7). God’s wrath included the cities and cultic sites in the hill country of Judah, leaving no protection for the people (6:3-6). Abominations that were practiced throughout the land caused God’s judgment to fall on the land as well as on the people (7:2-3, 10-11, 23). But because God is righteous, he judged the people according to their ways of life, desiring that they would once more acknowledge him as their God (7:27).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet then (chs 8–11) focused on the abominations practiced in Jerusalem, particularly idolatry in the temple courts, which caused the judgment announced in chapters 1–7. An idol had been erected in the inner court (8:3-5). By the wall of the court, elders of the city were paying homage to the idols that surrounded the court (vv 11-12). Closer to the temple, women were weeping for the god Tammuz (v 14), and men were worshiping the sun (v 16). In preparation for the ultimate judgment on the land, the prophet placed a mark on the foreheads of the few faithful Israelites so that they would survive (9:4-6). Then (ch 10), the glory of God, which had filled the temple from the time of Solomon, gradually left: “Then the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> went up from the city and stopped above the mountain to the east” (11:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people, now without divine protection, were being handed over to the Babylonians (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>The message of doom for Jerusalem contains four elements of hope: restoration of the people (11:17), restoration of the land (v 17), purification of the people (v 18), and renewed fellowship between God and his people (vv 19-20). The prophet develops those four themes in chapters 33–48.<\/p>\n<p>The visions of chapters 10 and 11 made clear that when God removed his presence from Jerusalem, the exile was approaching. Those who were already in Babylon were unwilling to believe that such an extensive devastation of Jerusalem would happen or that the people would all be exiled and the land become desolate.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel acted out the certainty of God’s word of judgment by packing his bags and showing the baggage to his fellow exiles. First, he placed the bags in the courtyard outside his modest home. Next, he went out by making a hole through the wall. Finally, the prophet walked about the settlement with his bags in full view. Skeptical observers did not understand Ezekiel and probably thought he was crazy. The believers who saw him understood. His strange actions dramatized how the king’s aides would do all they could to help King Zedekiah escape just before the fall of Jerusalem. Second Kings 25 tells how the king and his soldiers left Jerusalem for the wilderness, to be overtaken by the Babylonians at Jericho and brought before Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. As a captive, Zedekiah witnessed the murder of his sons; then his eyes were put out, and he was sent into exile with the other Judeans (cf. Ez 12:13). The prophet’s explanation concluded with a word of comfort. Because of his covenant with Abraham, God promised not to destroy the people completely. A remnant who overcame the sword, famine, and pestilence would live to tell the story of God’s judgment (vv 15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel further illustrated the nation’s plight by eating as though full of fear, depicting the great trauma that all of Judah’s inhabitants would soon undergo.<\/p>\n<p>Both symbolic acts, packing his belongings and eating, emphasized the truthfulness of God’s word. The people needed to face the nature of their God: He is magnificent, and when he speaks, his words are powerful and come to pass. Thus, the devastation of the land and the people’s exile were a fulfillment of God’s word through the prophets. The judgment was meant to produce a recognition of the Lord, repentance, and a return to God. Some in Judah doubted the efficacy of God’s prophecies, saying, “Time passes, making a liar of every prophet” (12:22). Others thought God’s word would come true in the distant future (v 27). The prevailing attitude of distrust in God’s word had been stimulated by the popular preaching of false prophets (ch 13). Never commissioned by the Lord, they deceived God’s people by lying and misdirecting them with messages of peace (vv 8-10). Wickedness, lying, and deceit were encouraged among the people by such false prophets (v 22). The magnitude of their sin and their great responsibility for Judah’s fall would be matched by the Lord’s heavy judgment. Yet God would save his people from such evil and will prepare a righteous nation with whom to maintain his covenant (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>The certainty of the judgment has been connected with the truthfulness of God’s word. Ezekiel’s difficult task of affirming the doom of Jerusalem to stubborn hearers was intensified by the people’s idolatry. Their whole way of life denied the existence of God. They practiced idolatry in their worship, and they had set up idols in their hearts (14:3). Before the covenant with God could be restored, they had to be purified from their idolatry. Even so, repentance would not guarantee immunity from judgment. Sword, famine, wild beasts, and plagues would ravage the population (v 21). After the execution of his judgment, God would take back those survivors who had turned to him for mercy. God would surely accomplish all that he intended for his people’s good (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 15–17 Ezekiel uses three parables to set forth the apostasy, present uselessness, and judgment of Israel. Jerusalem and Judah are compared to a piece of charred wood, an adulterous woman, and a vine.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 15 reviews Jerusalem’s case. Jerusalem is compared to a piece of wood, both ends of which have been charred with fire, so that the wood is of no value. As the whole piece of wood is burned instead of being saved, so Jerusalem would undergo complete devastation (15:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 16 presents God’s case against Jerusalem from a different perspective, stressing his care for Jerusalem in the past. The beginnings of her history are compared to the birth of a female child, left abandoned by her mother (16:3-5). God adopted the child and washed and clothed her (vv 6-7). He made a covenant with her (v 8), making her his own possession. He generously gave her all the fine things of life (vv 9-13). In the height of her development, Jerusalem’s fame spread to the nations (v 14). Her self-reliance made her a spiritual prostitute as she took up the religious practices and way of life of the nations (vv 15-34). The cities of Sodom (Gn 19) and Samaria (2 Kgs 17:6), known for their immorality, are called Jerusalem’s sisters (Ez 16:46). They had been judged by God, but the corruption of those cities was little compared to the lewdness of Jerusalem (vv 48-51). Thus, Jerusalem also would surely fall and become desolate. Yet Ezekiel anticipates the judgment’s final outcome; Jerusalem will be restored to covenantal blessing (vv 62-63) after her repentance.<\/p>\n<p>The third parable (ch 17) focuses on God’s sovereignty over political developments. Assyria was no longer a power to be reckoned with. Babylon and Egypt both exercised dominion, although the balance of power was veering in favor of Babylon. Their extension of power is likened to an eagle. Nebuchadnezzar, pictured as “a great eagle with broad wings full of many-colored feathers,” took control over the affairs of Judah by removing Jehoiachin, “the highest branch of a cedar tree,” from office and by exiling him with young leaders of the Judean state (17:3-4). Ezekiel was among them. Nebuchadnezzar let the Judeans control their own affairs under Zedekiah but expected them to be subject to Babylon and not to any other power. But Judah (likened to a vine) tried to ally itself with Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt, “another great eagle with broad wings and full plumage” (v 7), against Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah’s folly in turning to Egypt would cause Nebuchadnezzar to pull up the vine by its roots and make it wither (vv 9-10). In explaining the parable, God told the exiles that Judah’s fall was a result of its unfaithfulness to King Nebuchadnezzar, to whom Judah owed allegiance by covenant (vv 13-18). Judah’s unfaithfulness thus extended to all of its relationships: religious, cultural, and political. After the exile, God promised, he would restore his people to their land under a Messiah, “a tender shoot” (v 22). The messianic rule is signified by the young twig, which when planted in the land will become a magnificent cedar, giving shade and protection to the birds. Chapter 17 is an inspiring affirmation of the sovereignty of God in human affairs (“All the trees will know that it is I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, who cuts down the tall tree and helps the short tree to grow tall. It is I who makes the green tree wither and gives new life to the dead tree”—17:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 18–22 contain Ezekiel’s oracles to Judah, its leaders, and the exiles. First, he enunciates God’s standard of righteousness: “The person who sins will be the one who dies” (18:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people are charging God with injustice, for they believe themselves to be under God’s judgment for the sins of their ancestors (vv 25-29). Although the Ten Commandments do say that God may punish “the sins of their parents to the third and the fourth generations” (Ex 20:5, <span>nlt<\/span>), the prophet vindicates God’s justice, telling the people that they are not being punished merely for their ancestors’ sin. Each person must be directly accountable to God; the sinner will die in wickedness, and the righteous will live by righteousness. A life of faithfulness to God’s moral and civil law will be rewarded (Ez 18:5-9). Even if one’s father was a sinner, the father’s sin is not transferable (vv 14-18). God is ready to forgive any sinner who repents (v 27). The prophet’s vindication of God’s justice becomes a call to repentance. The sinners in Judah and in exile were thus warned of the consequences of their evil, and were exhorted to return to their God and his standard of right and wrong (vv 31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 19 contains two parables in the form of a lamentation. The first portrays a lioness and her two cubs. The lioness is Hamutal, the wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31), who bore two sons: Jehoahaz and Zedekiah. Jehoahaz is referred to in Ezekiel 19:3-4 as a cub who grew up and was taken to Egypt (by Pharaoh Neco in 608 <span>BC<\/span>; see 2 Kgs 23:31-34). Zedekiah succeeded to the throne ten years later. In the lamentation the prophet imaginatively represents Zedekiah as a young cub who is ultimately taken to Babylon as a rebellious ruler (Ez 19:7-9). The second parable changes the imagery to a vine, representing Israel (v 10). In its early days God blessed Israel with strong rulers, but now the vine was wilting as Zedekiah irresponsibly led Judah to its last days. Ezekiel’s lamentation stresses the lack of a good candidate for the throne and the lack of life in the vine (vv 13-14).<\/p>\n<p>In chapter 20 the prophet concludes God’s argument against his people. He reviews the history of Israel’s past, starting with God’s self-revelation in Egypt (20:5-6). He took to himself a stubborn nation, tied to idolatry (v 8) and prone to apostasy (vv 13, 21). Israel wanted to be one of the great nations (v 32) instead of a sanctified people (v 12). As a result of its spiritual hardness, Israel is dispersed to live among the nations (v 35). Yet God had a solemn covenant with Israel, made by oath to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. On the basis of that covenant, God will reach out with compassion to those who repent of their sinful ways (vv 37-44). In Israel’s judgment and restoration the nations will see the holiness of God, which does not tolerate unfaithfulness in Israel (v 41).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s prophecies alternate between God’s judgment on Israel’s sin and his restoration of Israel, spanning the bridge between Israel’s past and future. In view of the people’s doubts of the coming judgment on Jerusalem, he stresses the necessity of judgment and the need for repentance. Still, the future restoration of a remnant is touched upon here and there as the counterpart of his message of judgment. After announcing the fall of Jerusalem, the prophet shifts from a message of judgment to one of hope.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet returns to the proclamation of judgment in four oracles (20:45–21:32). He speaks against the Negev Desert area (20:45-49), Jerusalem and the land of Israel (21:2-17, 20-27), and against the Ammonites (vv 28-32). God permitted the sword of Nebuchadnezzar to be his instrument of judgment upon the Judeans (v 19). He would see to the judgment on the Ammonites. The Judeans would recover their previous glory, but the memory of the Ammonites would perish (vv 27, 32). The oracle against the Ammonites anticipates a larger treatise on Israel’s other neighbors: Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt (chs 25–29).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 22–24 contain a renewed series of indictments against Jerusalem. Jerusalem’s religious and civil leadership (the prophets, priests, and princes) are corrupt, and the people have followed their example (22:25-30). The parable of the two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, is a variation of the parable of adulterous Jerusalem (ch 23; cf. ch 16). It differs in that the comparison drawn between Jerusalem, soon to be exiled, and Samaria, already in exile, is more explicit in the parable of Oholah and Oholibah. In chapter 16 Jerusalem was charged with greater sins than Sodom and Samaria, but was promised restoration. Only the adulterous nature of the two sisters and God’s judgment on them is emphasized in chapter 23, with no word of restoration. This parable is a fitting introduction to that of the boiling pot (ch 24), in which Jerusalem is compared to a rusty pot boiling with water. The Jerusalemites, likened to pieces of meat in the boiling pot, will die in the city. The parable was pronounced on the starting day of Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem. Thus, the exiles were divinely forewarned of God’s intent to destroy the temple (24:21) and were prepared for messengers bringing the bad news of Jerusalem’s fall.<\/p>\n<p>Those oracles and parables conclude the first division of the book. Ezekiel has stated God’s case against the rebellious house of Judah in many ways. His metaphors have likened Judah to a burnt piece of wood, to an uprooted vine, to a baby who grew up to be an adulteress, and to Oholibah, the adulterous woman. He has countered arguments against the fulfillment of God’s word and against the justice of God. He has reassured the exiles that God will not leave the righteous and that the future of Israel begins with a righteous remnant. The pendulum of Ezekiel’s writing has swung from judgment to restoration, while the clock was bringing Judah closer to the hour of its fall.<\/p>\n<h5>Oracles against the Nations (25:1–32:32)<\/h5>\n<p>Ammon, Moab, and Edom were Israel’s neighbors to the east. Because they were ethnically related to Israel, they were not attacked by the Israelites on their march to the Promised Land. Ammon and Moab were descendants of Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and the Edomites descended from Esau, the brother of Jacob. Although God forbade war with them, relations between Israel and its eastern neighbors were always tense. Israel had been overrun by the Ammonites for a time, and Israel was never successful in controlling the Edomites’ competitive trade relations. Those neighboring nations joined the Babylonian attack against Jerusalem and rejoiced when Jerusalem fell and the temple was devastated (Ez 25:3-12). They were ready to take over and loot Judah’s cities, and to instigate trouble in a time when Jerusalem was distressed. Therefore, says Ezekiel, God’s judgment will also extend to Ammon, Moab, and Edom (vv 4-14).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines had been Israel’s enemy to the southwest. During the period of the judges and the united monarchy, the Philistines had controlled much of Israel’s territory. King David successfully limited the Philistine threat by confining them to their own territory. But in Ezekiel’s day they were still considered Israel’s “everlasting” enemy (25:15), possibly intensified by Philistine support of the Babylonian invasion of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>The city of Tyre had received reports of the overthrow of Jerusalem and was ready to exploit the opportunity for its own advantage (26:2). Tyre’s trade position was unrivaled; its ships crossed the seas to exchange goods with many distant lands (Ez 27). But Tyre would soon be broken by the Babylonians, its wealth dried up with the destruction of the fleet and the murder of its sailors (27:26).<\/p>\n<p>The prince of Tyre is singled out in chapter 28, but verse 12 refers to the “king” of Tyre. Interpreters disagree whether they are one person or two. Those who distinguish between the two understand the prince of Tyre to be the ruler of that city, but they consider the “king” of Tyre to represent Satan (28:13-15). The Garden of Eden with all its splendor is an appropriate setting for the original glory of an angelic Satan before his fall. But there is no reason within the context to distinguish between the prince and the king of Tyre. Each is said to have exalted himself, and both took authority over men as if they were gods and enjoyed all the splendor and royalty that belong to God. And both prince and king fall from their high position. The passage is a magnificent example of Ezekiel’s literary ability. He draws a glorious picture of the Garden of Eden, reworking the same theme as he depicts the glory and fall of the king of Tyre. Ezekiel presents him as a cherub, in accordance with the local belief that the king was divine. He wore the finest clothing, with nine kinds of precious stones (v 13). Though God had elevated him to the royal throne (vv 13-14), the king’s heart turned to materialism and to religious and judicial corruption (vv 16-18). In a sense the king (prince) represents the people of Tyre. They were all guilty of corruption, injustice, and violence. If God judged his covenant people for their perversion of justice and for their sins, his judgment would surely come also on the city of Tyre (vv 18-19). When the Babylonians marched on Tyre, they laboriously built a jetty from the mainland to the city. At the same time Tyrian ships loaded with goods and treasures sailed out across the Mediterranean, so that when Nebuchadnezzar’s troops finally breached the walls, little loot could be taken (29:18).<\/p>\n<p>The city of Sidon also cheered Jerusalem’s destruction. Sidon was a port city in Phoenicia, to the north of Tyre. By pestilence and war, the inhabitants of Sidon would learn the justice of Israel’s God.<\/p>\n<p>Six nations (Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, and Sidon) scorned Israel at the fall of Jerusalem. Because God had invested his holiness in the temple of Jerusalem and in his people, the temple’s destruction and the people’s exile signified to the nations that Israel’s God was impotent. They did not realize that the reason for Israel’s fate was God’s intolerance of his people’s sin. God’s holiness required the punishment of sin, and it also required vindication for his name (28:22-23). God was still concerned for his people, that Israel might know he had removed the scorn of their neighbors (v 24). In the restoration of Israel the Lord would further manifest his holiness before the nations. Israel would receive back the land, vineyards, and houses, and would enjoy the bounty of the Lord in peace (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>Egypt had convinced the people of Israel and Judah that with its help the Assyrians and the Babylonians could not stand their ground in Palestine. In 722 <span>BC<\/span> the Assyrian troops took the northern capital of Samaria, and in 586 the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem, while Egypt remained passive. The Egyptians had desired control over Palestine for economic reasons, but not at the expense of their own welfare. Egypt, too, would lose its leadership under God’s judgment (29:9-16). Reduced to dependence on foreign powers, Egypt would no longer be a stumbling block for Israel. First, Babylonia was permitted to break Egypt’s power (23:1–32:21); later, the Persians, Greeks, and Romans would incorporate Egypt as a province. The fall of Egypt coincided with the fall of several great and small kingdoms: Assyria (32:22-23), Elam (vv 24-25), Meshech and Tubal (vv 26-28), Edom (v 29), and Sidon (v 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Proclamation of Hope (33:1–48:35)<\/h5>\n<p>After the visions of God’s judgment on the surrounding nations, Ezekiel returns to the future hope of Israel. In the first major section of his book he dealt with the reasons for Judah’s exile and the destruction of the temple, alluding often to the future of Israel. But the prophet’s organization of his material included, between prophecies of Israel’s judgment and restoration, the oracles of God’s judgment on Israel’s neighbors who had encouraged and rejoiced in its fall. Throughout its history Israel had allowed foreign nations to influence its religion, culture, and form of government. The reduction of their powers meant Israel, restored to the Promised Land, would be more free for faithfulness to God. Before taking up the theme of the restoration, Ezekiel reviews the emphases of chapters 1–24: (1) He was called to be a watchman over Israel (33:1-9; cf. 1:1–3:21). (2) Israel had sinned against the Lord and had to receive a righteous judgment (33:10). (3) Jerusalem was to be taken by the Babylonians (v 21). (4) Israel’s repentance is necessary for restoration (vv 11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Thus far, his ministry had not met with success. The exiles who had heard his messages were full of appreciation for Ezekiel’s rhetorical and literary abilities (33:32). They readily accepted Ezekiel as a watchman who warned the people of the impending catastrophe at Jerusalem, and they may have admitted that their sin was the reason for God’s judgment on Israel and Jerusalem. But they were slow in applying the prophetic word to their own lives. God was ready to forgive their sins if they repented, acknowledged him, and demonstrated their renewed spirit by practicing the law of God (v 32). Now that the news of Jerusalem had been reported to the exiles (v 21), the necessity for the people to act responsibly was even more urgent. The Lord had demonstrated that Ezekiel was a true prophet (v 33).<\/p>\n<p>The success of Ezekiel’s ministry was not measured in numbers. He faithfully declared the word of God in word, sign, and parable. The exiles had followed the false hopes proclaimed by false “shepherds” who had fattened themselves at the expense of the flock (34:2-3). They did not take care of those in need (v 4), and they allowed the flock to be scattered (vv 5-6). God promised his people that he would be the faithful shepherd, bring the sheep together, feed them, and care for them (34:11-15; cf. Ps 23). God would also distinguish between the sheep and the goats, to find out whose hearts were right with him, so that the true sheep could be restored to God’s flock (Ez 34:20-22). God’s promise included the restoration of the land and the restoration of the divinely appointed Davidic dynasty (v 24). The renewed fellowship between the Lord and Israel under the messianic ruler would be sealed with a new covenant, the “covenant of peace.” That covenant assured the people of God’s blessing on their labor, bringing them abundant harvests (vv 26-27). The people would not be forced to fight against nature in their pursuits (vv 25-28). They would not have to struggle against other peoples who might try to share in their blessings by force (vv 27-29). The prophetic vision telescoped the events of the restoration of Israel after the exile, the coming of Jesus the Messiah (cf. Jn 10), and the full restoration of the sin-cursed world.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 34 is the key to the messages of restoration. The emphases include the outworking of the frequently repeated verse “They will truly be my people, and I will be their God” (11:20; cf. 34:30; 36:28). The most significant aspects of the restoration theme include: (1) God’s gracious restoration of his people to covenant blessing (36:20-36; 37:23-26; 39:25); (2) God’s restoration of the nation of Israel to the land (36:1-15, 24; 37:14-23; 39:27); (3) God’s new covenant, giving his Spirit to his people (36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29), and his blessing on his people (36:8-12, 29-38; 39:9-10, 26), assuring them of victory over their enemies (35:1-15; 36:36; 37:28; 38:1–39:24); (4) God’s appointment of a Davidic king, the Messiah, over his people (37:24-25); and (5) God’s temple restored among his people (37:26-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The People of God<\/h6>\n<p>The rejection of the exiles did not last forever. Based on the Abrahamic covenant, the Lord promised to bless the faithful remnant and to make of them a new people. The imagery of a valley of dry bones is particularly fitting. The dry bones represent God’s people without hope (37:11). Ezekiel proclaims to them the good news that God will renew and restore them (v 12). The Lord’s purpose for his people is that all the nations may honor his holy name through his people (39:7, 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The Land<\/h6>\n<p>The promise also extends to the land, originally given to Abraham and his descendants. The Abrahamic covenant included a messianic element, for through the family of Abraham living in the Promised Land all nations would receive God’s blessing (Gn 12:3). In a vision Ezekiel saw the boundaries and described the division of the land (Ez 47–48). The royal city of Jerusalem is the central symbol of God’s presence among his people; its name will be “The Lord is there” (48:8-35).<\/p>\n<h6>The New Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Abrahamic covenant is renewed, a gracious covenant that expresses the restored relationship. “Covenant of peace” fittingly describes its nature and benefits. The restless people of God are promised rest from their searching, their enemies, and their toil. The change in relationship is further emphasized by God’s sending of his Spirit, who will add a new dimension to the lifestyle of his people. Obedience to God will no longer be constrained, for God’s Spirit helps his people to do his will. A new heart, controlled by the Spirit of God, is given to the Lord’s people (36:26-27). The presence of the Spirit also signifies a new life for the people (37:14; see Jn 3:8, 16; Acts 2:38; Rom 8:2-4, 15).<\/p>\n<h6>The Messiah<\/h6>\n<p>The OT hope of a messianic king is crystallized in Ezekiel’s message. His rule will be everlasting (Ez 37:25), over all God’s people who have new hearts (vv 15-25).<\/p>\n<h6>The Temple<\/h6>\n<p>As a priest, Ezekiel remained keenly interested in the temple, priesthood, sacrificial regulations, and festivals. A large section of the prophecy’s last division describes the temple’s revived worship (40:1–46:24). His vision of the glory of God, so important in the messages of God’s judgment on Jerusalem (chs 1, 10–11), now assures the remnant that God did not forsake his people (43:2-5). He will dwell among them, for the temple is a symbol of God’s presence (37:27). Some interpreters believe that the temple, with its ritual as described in Ezekiel 40–46, will be restored in the messianic era before the last judgment. Others believe the promises about the temple provide a positive symbolic answer to Ezekiel’s greatest concern: whether God will return to be with his people (48:35; see Jn 2:21; Rv 21:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are various interpretations of chapters 34–48. As a watchman to Israel, Ezekiel had a message for the exiled Jewish community. Thus the prophecy’s fulfillment must have begun with the decree of Cyrus I (538 <span>BC<\/span>) permitting the Jews to return to their land (Ezr 1:1-3). Two rival schools of interpretation exist on how the prophecy is fulfilled beyond Israel’s restoration to the land. Those who interpret Israel as simply the nation view the modern return of Jewish people to the land of Israel as a continuation of God’s prophetic promise. They believe that God’s plan for Israel is being fulfilled along with, and in addition to, his plan for the Christian church. The fulfillment of those prophecies will be inaugurated by the coming of the messianic king, who will give earthly peace to the Jewish people. The temple worship (Ez 40–48) will be restored in some way during the period of the messianic kingdom. The church will enjoy a small share in all the events centered on the Jews. The promises of Ezekiel’s vision are thus limited to the nation of Israel and must be fulfilled before the coming of a new heaven and earth.<\/p>\n<p>Other interpreters believe that Ezekiel wrote for the benefit of spiritual descendants of Abraham who believe, as Abraham did, in God’s promises (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:11-13; Gal 3:6-9, 29). All who have faith like Abraham, whether Jews or Gentiles, are regarded as Abraham’s offspring (Gal 3:28-29). Ezekiel’s message thus would include all of God’s gracious work among Christian Gentiles, who have become the recipients of God’s promises and benefits. It is possible, on the basis of 1 Peter 1:10-11, to interpret Ezekiel’s language as a prophetic expression of how God’s grace would come to all those who become reconciled to God through faith in the gospel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Ezekiel (Person); Prophecy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EZEKIEL, Book of Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile. Preview • Author • Date and Background • Content Author Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the ...","summary_en":"EZEKIEL, Book of Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile. Preview • Author • Date and Background • Content Author Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31237,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Presence of God","title_en":"the Presence of God","content_ro":"<h3>PRESENCE OF GOD, T<span>he<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>God’s manifestation of his spiritual being. Since God is spirit, believers experience him by sensing his invisible presence. God also makes himself known in other ways. He appears in nature, particularly in catastrophic forces—fire, lightning, and earthquake (1 Kgs 19:11-13). He also appears in human form (Gn 18; 32:22-32). So God, who cannot be seen, has chosen ways to reveal himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Angel of the Lord<\/h5>\n<p>The angel of the Lord was God’s emissary and Israel’s special helper, although it is not said that the same angel is meant in every instance (Ex 14:19; 23:20; 33:2). After the angel vanishes, Hagar insists that she had seen God himself (Gn 16:13). In Jacob’s experience the angel identifies himself with God (31:11-13); while in Genesis 21:18, 22:11, Numbers 22:35, the “I” of deity signified God’s presence in the angel. There is also oscillation between God and the angel in Exodus 12:23 and Genesis 48:15-16. Here God was temporarily incarnating himself within the form of the angel, assuring his own that he was immediately present with them.<\/p>\n<h5>The Glory of God<\/h5>\n<p>Glory is what God possesses in his own right, a visible extension of his nature, a “concrete” form of his divine presence. The heavens are a visible form of God’s presence (Pss 8; 19:1-6; 136:5), for they are his glory. The glory that appeared to Israel as devouring fire on Sinai (Ex 29:43) filled the tabernacle (40:34-38). By it God consecrated the tabernacle as the place of his presence. In Isaiah 6 the glory appears as the normal expression of the divine presence. In Ezekiel the glory is identical with God (Ez 9:3-4). Throughout the OT the glory of God is the transcendent God making his presence and nearness visible to his own.<\/p>\n<h5>The Face of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT “presence” is used to represent the Hebrew word for “face”; when “face” is conjoined with a preposition, it means “in the presence of.” In Genesis 32:30 Jacob saw God “face to face.” A man’s personality and character are made visible on his face. In this sense a man’s face is the man. So, “the angel of his presence [face]” (Is 63:9) may mean “the angel who is his face,” since the prophet may have intended the identification. The face of God is the revelation of the grace of God. So, when he hides his face, he is withholding his grace. But when he makes his face shine (Ps 31:16), there is blessing (44:3). The face of God, then, is the presence of God (Ex 33:14). To pray to God in a holy place was to “seek God’s face” (Ps 24:6), his personal presence. Indeed, this sums up temple worship and private prayer in Israel (63:1-3; 100:2). The blessing of God consisted in his face shining upon them (Nm 6:25; Ps 80:3, 7, 19).<\/p>\n<h5>The Name of God<\/h5>\n<p>Among Semites, the equation of the name and the person was a common idea. So also, the name of God was an interchangeable term for God himself, a symbol of his activity in revelation. The linking of man’s worship of God with the divine name of God was the medium of his operation (Pss 44:5; 89:24; Is 30:27), a designation for the power of God that radiates help and energy universally. God could act by his name. The angel of the Lord’s authority and power functioned because God’s name was in him (Ex 23:20-21). As bearer of the divine name, he made real the hidden presence of God. The temple was the dwelling place of the name (1 Kgs 11:36), not only because God’s name was invoked there but also because God’s presence—God himself—dwelt there.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the Holy Spirit the transcendent God draws near to his people. The Spirit is the medium through whom God’s presence becomes real among his people (Is 63:11-14; Zec 7:12) and by whom God’s gifts and powers operate among them (2 Chr 15:1; 20:14; 24:20; Zec 4:6; 6:1-8). The Spirit was the presence and power of God with his people—God himself acting in accordance with his essential nature. The sinner cannot be in the presence of God without the aid of God’s Holy Spirit; to be deprived of the Holy Spirit is to be deprived of God’s presence (Ps 51:11). Without the Spirit, communion between God and humans is not possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT a new mode of God’s presence is revealed. It is in Jesus Christ the incarnate Word that God is present among his own (Jn 1:14-18; 17:6, 26). Jesus’ mission was to reveal God to humanity. This he did through his whole life’s work as well as through his words. His revelation of the name of God was expressed in his own name—Jesus (“The Lord Is Salvation”). And in the person of Jesus the function of the name of God found fulfillment. Christ was the new temple (Jn 1:14; 2:21; Col 2:9). He was the locus of the tabernacling presence of God. But that was only a first installment of the unveiling of God’s presence.<\/p>\n<p>The church now constitutes the temple of God in the NT. Christianity is essentially the religion of the presence of God and of communion with God. The body of Christ, “the spiritual temple” (Eph 2:22), made of “living stones” (1 Pt 2:5), is the residence of the presence of the glorious God.<\/p>\n<p>And now, the individual Christian is also a temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16). God is especially present in the Christian’s spirit; there God reigns, for there is his kingdom; there he is worshiped, for there his glory and his presence have consecrated the inner being into a temple (see Jn 14:23).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRESENCE OF GOD, T<span>he<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>God’s manifestation of his spiritual being. Since God is spirit, believers experience him by sensing his invisible presence. God also makes himself known in other ways. He appears in nature, particularly in catastrophic forces—fire, lightning, and earthquake (1 Kgs 19:11-13). He also appears in human form (Gn 18; 32:22-32). So God, who cannot be seen, has chosen ways to reveal himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Angel of the Lord<\/h5>\n<p>The angel of the Lord was God’s emissary and Israel’s special helper, although it is not said that the same angel is meant in every instance (Ex 14:19; 23:20; 33:2). After the angel vanishes, Hagar insists that she had seen God himself (Gn 16:13). In Jacob’s experience the angel identifies himself with God (31:11-13); while in Genesis 21:18, 22:11, Numbers 22:35, the “I” of deity signified God’s presence in the angel. There is also oscillation between God and the angel in Exodus 12:23 and Genesis 48:15-16. Here God was temporarily incarnating himself within the form of the angel, assuring his own that he was immediately present with them.<\/p>\n<h5>The Glory of God<\/h5>\n<p>Glory is what God possesses in his own right, a visible extension of his nature, a “concrete” form of his divine presence. The heavens are a visible form of God’s presence (Pss 8; 19:1-6; 136:5), for they are his glory. The glory that appeared to Israel as devouring fire on Sinai (Ex 29:43) filled the tabernacle (40:34-38). By it God consecrated the tabernacle as the place of his presence. In Isaiah 6 the glory appears as the normal expression of the divine presence. In Ezekiel the glory is identical with God (Ez 9:3-4). Throughout the OT the glory of God is the transcendent God making his presence and nearness visible to his own.<\/p>\n<h5>The Face of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT “presence” is used to represent the Hebrew word for “face”; when “face” is conjoined with a preposition, it means “in the presence of.” In Genesis 32:30 Jacob saw God “face to face.” A man’s personality and character are made visible on his face. In this sense a man’s face is the man. So, “the angel of his presence [face]” (Is 63:9) may mean “the angel who is his face,” since the prophet may have intended the identification. The face of God is the revelation of the grace of God. So, when he hides his face, he is withholding his grace. But when he makes his face shine (Ps 31:16), there is blessing (44:3). The face of God, then, is the presence of God (Ex 33:14). To pray to God in a holy place was to “seek God’s face” (Ps 24:6), his personal presence. Indeed, this sums up temple worship and private prayer in Israel (63:1-3; 100:2). The blessing of God consisted in his face shining upon them (Nm 6:25; Ps 80:3, 7, 19).<\/p>\n<h5>The Name of God<\/h5>\n<p>Among Semites, the equation of the name and the person was a common idea. So also, the name of God was an interchangeable term for God himself, a symbol of his activity in revelation. The linking of man’s worship of God with the divine name of God was the medium of his operation (Pss 44:5; 89:24; Is 30:27), a designation for the power of God that radiates help and energy universally. God could act by his name. The angel of the Lord’s authority and power functioned because God’s name was in him (Ex 23:20-21). As bearer of the divine name, he made real the hidden presence of God. The temple was the dwelling place of the name (1 Kgs 11:36), not only because God’s name was invoked there but also because God’s presence—God himself—dwelt there.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the Holy Spirit the transcendent God draws near to his people. The Spirit is the medium through whom God’s presence becomes real among his people (Is 63:11-14; Zec 7:12) and by whom God’s gifts and powers operate among them (2 Chr 15:1; 20:14; 24:20; Zec 4:6; 6:1-8). The Spirit was the presence and power of God with his people—God himself acting in accordance with his essential nature. The sinner cannot be in the presence of God without the aid of God’s Holy Spirit; to be deprived of the Holy Spirit is to be deprived of God’s presence (Ps 51:11). Without the Spirit, communion between God and humans is not possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT a new mode of God’s presence is revealed. It is in Jesus Christ the incarnate Word that God is present among his own (Jn 1:14-18; 17:6, 26). Jesus’ mission was to reveal God to humanity. This he did through his whole life’s work as well as through his words. His revelation of the name of God was expressed in his own name—Jesus (“The Lord Is Salvation”). And in the person of Jesus the function of the name of God found fulfillment. Christ was the new temple (Jn 1:14; 2:21; Col 2:9). He was the locus of the tabernacling presence of God. But that was only a first installment of the unveiling of God’s presence.<\/p>\n<p>The church now constitutes the temple of God in the NT. Christianity is essentially the religion of the presence of God and of communion with God. The body of Christ, “the spiritual temple” (Eph 2:22), made of “living stones” (1 Pt 2:5), is the residence of the presence of the glorious God.<\/p>\n<p>And now, the individual Christian is also a temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16). God is especially present in the Christian’s spirit; there God reigns, for there is his kingdom; there he is worshiped, for there his glory and his presence have consecrated the inner being into a temple (see Jn 14:23).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRESENCE OF GOD, The God’s manifestation of his spiritual being. Since God is spirit, believers experience him by sensing his invisible presence. God also makes himself known in other ways. He appears in nature, particularly in catastrophic forces—fire, lightning, and earthquake (1 Kgs 19:11-13). He also appears in human form (Gn 18; 32:22-32). So God, who cannot be seen, has chosen ways to reveal himself. In the Old Testament The Angel of the Lord The angel of the Lord was God’s emissary and...","summary_en":"PRESENCE OF GOD, The God’s manifestation of his spiritual being. Since God is spirit, believers experience him by sensing his invisible presence. God also makes himself known in other ways. He appears in nature, particularly in catastrophic forces—fire, lightning, and earthquake (1 Kgs 19:11-13). He also appears in human form (Gn 18; 32:22-32). So God, who cannot be seen, has chosen ways to reveal himself. In the Old Testament The Angel of the Lord The angel of the Lord was God’s emissary and...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61900,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Worship","title_en":"Temple Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","summary_en":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89526,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Worship","title_en":"Temple Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","summary_en":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117152,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Worship","title_en":"Temple Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","summary_en":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144778,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Worship","title_en":"Temple Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Worship<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy.<\/p>\n<p>It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a large structure—90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with a vestibule 15 feet deep stretching across the width (see 1 Kgs 6:2-10). It employed the most sophisticated building techniques of the age, and no expense was spared in construction, ornamentation, or equipment. Even so, Solomon readily confessed to its utter inadequacy to house the eternal God (1 Kgs 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple, located adjacent to the king’s palace, represented God’s reign over all creation and all nations: “The <span>Lord<\/span> is in his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (Hab 2:20). It served to teach Israel about God’s exclusive dominion and their total dependence on him. And although God cannot be confined to a building, he chose to make the Temple the focal point of his presence on earth. As such, the Temple was central for Israelite worship and for the personal relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The kings were charged to devote themselves to God and to encourage the proper worship of God at his dwelling place, the Temple (see 1 Chr 22:17-19). The Temple also established the legitimacy of the human king, who represented divine rule. This role of the Temple was expressed in Psalm 132, which celebrated David’s restoration of the Ark to Jerusalem (Ps 132:6-12). This psalm was used at the conclusion of Solomon’s prayer of dedication (2 Chr 6:41-42).<\/p>\n<p>The Temple’s purpose in representing God’s presence in the world was later fulfilled in Christ and the church. Jesus himself signaled the transition from the Temple buildings to his own body as the temple (see John 2:19), and the disciples began understanding this transition after the resurrection (John 2:21-22). The apostle Paul later described the church as the new sacred space where Jews and Gentiles are reconciled. Using Temple imagery, he described breaking down barriers in the body of Christ, creating one people (Eph 2:14-15). The church stands as a holy temple, resting on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20-22). It is built from living stones—believers—fashioned together around Jesus Christ, the cornerstone (1 Pet 2:4-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 8:27-53; 1 Chr 22:1-19; 2 Chr 5:2-14; 6:41-42; 7:12-16; Ps 48:9; 65:4; 66:13; 138:2; Jer 7:3-11; 11:15; Ezek 8:6-16; 44:1-31; Joel 1:14; 2:17; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:7; John 2:19-22; Eph 2:14-15, 20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","summary_en":"Temple Worship Throughout the ancient Near East, it was a king’s responsibility to provide for his nation’s temple. David, the founder of the dynasty of Judah’s kings, established Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (2 Sam 5:4-10) and made it the central place of worship. Although Solomon actually built the Temple, David prepared for the building of the Temple and for its liturgy. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple in Jerusalem, beginning in the fourth year of his reign (967 BC). ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":56350,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:22<\/strong> <em>they believed:<\/em> Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:22<\/strong> <em>they believed:<\/em> Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:22 they believed: Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).","summary_en":"2:22 they believed: Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83976,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:22<\/strong> <em>they believed:<\/em> Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:22<\/strong> <em>they believed:<\/em> Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:22 they believed: Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).","summary_en":"2:22 they believed: Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111602,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:22<\/strong> <em>they believed:<\/em> Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:22<\/strong> <em>they believed:<\/em> Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:22 they believed: Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).","summary_en":"2:22 they believed: Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139228,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:22<\/strong> <em>they believed:<\/em> Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:22<\/strong> <em>they believed:<\/em> Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:22 they believed: Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).","summary_en":"2:22 they believed: Witnessing a miracle from God can inspire belief, but it is not the deepest faith possible (20:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":26030,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Miracle","title_en":"Miracle","content_ro":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","summary_en":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35336,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sign","title_en":"Sign","content_ro":"<h3>SIGN<\/h3>\n<p>Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the Mosaic covenant. Thus, the wearing of the law on the wrist and forehead and the keeping of the Sabbath are considered signs of the relationship between Israel and God (Dt 6:8; 11:18; Ez 20:12, 20).<\/p>\n<p>The most numerous and significant usages of “sign” appear in relation to the OT prophetic ministry. Beginning with Moses, signs are used to confirm that God has spoken to the prophet. Thus, when Moses received the message of deliverance that he was to bring to the children of Israel in Egypt and the pharaoh, he was given two signs: his staff was changed into a serpent and his hand was afflicted with leprosy (Ex 4:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Signs and wonders were also used by false prophets. After a sign had been given and had come to pass, the leaders of Israel were to examine the message of the prophet to see if it led the people away from the true worship of God. If it did, the prophet who had given the sign was to be put to death (Dt 13:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The character of the sign varies and often is miraculous. Some of the great miracles of the OT are prophetic signs—for example, the moving of the shadow back up the steps of Hezekiah’s palace to confirm Isaiah’s prediction that the king would recover from what was a mortal illness (2 Kgs 20:8-9; Is 38:21-22). Often the sign is predictive only, and the people can know whether the prophet has spoken the truth by whether or not the event comes to pass—for example, the prophet’s foretelling the death of both of Eli’s sons on the same day (1 Sm 2:34; see also 14:10; 2 Kgs 19:29; Is 37:30). Sometimes the sign was carefully timed, and the recipient was told that the appearance of the sign would show when to act to fulfill the prophetic message (1 Sm 10:7-9). At other times, the events predicted were acted out in the life of the prophet. These symbolic actions demonstrated the truth of the prophet’s message—for example, Isaiah’s nakedness for three years to demonstrate the fate of those who preached trust in Egypt’s power (Is 20:3; see also Ez 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT occurrences are much like those in the OT. There are references to heavenly signs that will occur as indications of the end of time, and those with special knowledge will understand that the end is drawing near (Mt 24:3, 30; Mk 13:4, 22; Lk 21:11, 25-26). These apocalyptic signs have no astrological connotations as in the OT. There is also mention of the sign as the seal of the covenant between God and Israel in reference to circumcision in Romans 4:11.<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the NT uses of signs are confirmations of the message given by God, and this message comes through the apostolic community to the church. Thus, there is great emphasis on the way God confirms the message of the apostles through their ability to perform signs and wonders (Acts 2:43; 4:30; 5:12; 8:13; 14:3; Rom 15:19; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus’ miracles are not called signs. Only in Acts 2:22 does Peter proclaim that Jesus’ message was attested by signs he performed. Rather, Jesus’ miracles are seen as acts of divine power and mercy. When the Jews ask for a sign, they are consistently refused, with the promise that the only sign they will receive is the sign of Jonah (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1; Mk 8:11-12; Lk 11:19, 30), a sign that refers to the death and resurrection of the Christ. As Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, however, the miracles of Jesus are seen in a strikingly different light and are considered signs. Beginning with the changing of water into wine (Jn 2:1-11), the miracles are called signs and are intended to lead those who see them to faith (v 23). Jesus even laments that the people will not believe unless they see signs (4:48). John’s purpose in writing his Gospel is to present the signs of Jesus so that those who come to faith may do so through seeing these signs (20:30). The signs in the Gospel are expressly chosen because they lend themselves to the development of true faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the miracles of Jesus confirm the teaching of Jesus. In the synoptic Gospels, the miracles are seen as acts of mercy and divine power. In John they are carefully selected to demonstrate what Jesus has to tell the world about himself. In this respect, they are a bit like the symbolic actions of Isaiah and Ezekiel in that the action of the speaker dramatizes the message. After Jesus feeds the 5,000 with the five loaves of bread and the two fishes, he announces in the synagogue at Capernaum, “I am the bread of life which came down from heaven” (Jn 6:51). He tells them not to labor for the bread of this world that perishes. In much the same way, the healing of the man born blind is bound up with Jesus’ teaching that he is the light of the world (9:5). The resurrection of Lazarus prepares the way for Jesus to proclaim that he is the resurrection and the life (11:25). In John’s Gospel the signs are not only a demonstration of divine power but also a revelation of Jesus’ divine character. In addition to confirming his divine message, they also proclaim his personhood and mission.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Miracle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SIGN<\/h3>\n<p>Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the Mosaic covenant. Thus, the wearing of the law on the wrist and forehead and the keeping of the Sabbath are considered signs of the relationship between Israel and God (Dt 6:8; 11:18; Ez 20:12, 20).<\/p>\n<p>The most numerous and significant usages of “sign” appear in relation to the OT prophetic ministry. Beginning with Moses, signs are used to confirm that God has spoken to the prophet. Thus, when Moses received the message of deliverance that he was to bring to the children of Israel in Egypt and the pharaoh, he was given two signs: his staff was changed into a serpent and his hand was afflicted with leprosy (Ex 4:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Signs and wonders were also used by false prophets. After a sign had been given and had come to pass, the leaders of Israel were to examine the message of the prophet to see if it led the people away from the true worship of God. If it did, the prophet who had given the sign was to be put to death (Dt 13:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The character of the sign varies and often is miraculous. Some of the great miracles of the OT are prophetic signs—for example, the moving of the shadow back up the steps of Hezekiah’s palace to confirm Isaiah’s prediction that the king would recover from what was a mortal illness (2 Kgs 20:8-9; Is 38:21-22). Often the sign is predictive only, and the people can know whether the prophet has spoken the truth by whether or not the event comes to pass—for example, the prophet’s foretelling the death of both of Eli’s sons on the same day (1 Sm 2:34; see also 14:10; 2 Kgs 19:29; Is 37:30). Sometimes the sign was carefully timed, and the recipient was told that the appearance of the sign would show when to act to fulfill the prophetic message (1 Sm 10:7-9). At other times, the events predicted were acted out in the life of the prophet. These symbolic actions demonstrated the truth of the prophet’s message—for example, Isaiah’s nakedness for three years to demonstrate the fate of those who preached trust in Egypt’s power (Is 20:3; see also Ez 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT occurrences are much like those in the OT. There are references to heavenly signs that will occur as indications of the end of time, and those with special knowledge will understand that the end is drawing near (Mt 24:3, 30; Mk 13:4, 22; Lk 21:11, 25-26). These apocalyptic signs have no astrological connotations as in the OT. There is also mention of the sign as the seal of the covenant between God and Israel in reference to circumcision in Romans 4:11.<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the NT uses of signs are confirmations of the message given by God, and this message comes through the apostolic community to the church. Thus, there is great emphasis on the way God confirms the message of the apostles through their ability to perform signs and wonders (Acts 2:43; 4:30; 5:12; 8:13; 14:3; Rom 15:19; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus’ miracles are not called signs. Only in Acts 2:22 does Peter proclaim that Jesus’ message was attested by signs he performed. Rather, Jesus’ miracles are seen as acts of divine power and mercy. When the Jews ask for a sign, they are consistently refused, with the promise that the only sign they will receive is the sign of Jonah (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1; Mk 8:11-12; Lk 11:19, 30), a sign that refers to the death and resurrection of the Christ. As Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, however, the miracles of Jesus are seen in a strikingly different light and are considered signs. Beginning with the changing of water into wine (Jn 2:1-11), the miracles are called signs and are intended to lead those who see them to faith (v 23). Jesus even laments that the people will not believe unless they see signs (4:48). John’s purpose in writing his Gospel is to present the signs of Jesus so that those who come to faith may do so through seeing these signs (20:30). The signs in the Gospel are expressly chosen because they lend themselves to the development of true faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the miracles of Jesus confirm the teaching of Jesus. In the synoptic Gospels, the miracles are seen as acts of mercy and divine power. In John they are carefully selected to demonstrate what Jesus has to tell the world about himself. In this respect, they are a bit like the symbolic actions of Isaiah and Ezekiel in that the action of the speaker dramatizes the message. After Jesus feeds the 5,000 with the five loaves of bread and the two fishes, he announces in the synagogue at Capernaum, “I am the bread of life which came down from heaven” (Jn 6:51). He tells them not to labor for the bread of this world that perishes. In much the same way, the healing of the man born blind is bound up with Jesus’ teaching that he is the light of the world (9:5). The resurrection of Lazarus prepares the way for Jesus to proclaim that he is the resurrection and the life (11:25). In John’s Gospel the signs are not only a demonstration of divine power but also a revelation of Jesus’ divine character. In addition to confirming his divine message, they also proclaim his personhood and mission.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Miracle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SIGN Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event. In the Old Testament In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the...","summary_en":"SIGN Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event. In the Old Testament In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60309,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Plagues","title_en":"The Plagues","content_ro":"<h3>The Plagues<\/h3>\n<p>Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may have believed about God when they arrived in Egypt, they were certainly infected with the prevailing pagan views during their sojourn there (see Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues revealed the Lord’s absolute superiority over everything in creation. These cataclysmic events were specifically aimed at elements the Egyptians revered and worshiped:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>The Nile Turned to Blood<\/em> (7:14-25): The Nile, revered as a god who gave Egypt life and fertility, became a bloody representation of death.<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Frogs<\/em> (8:1-15): The Egyptians revered frogs (represented by Heqet, frog-headed goddess of fruitfulness) as having the key of life beyond death. Now frogs filled the land with the stink of death.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Gnats<\/em> (8:16-19): The “finger of God” fell on the land with a plague of biting insects that came from the earth, revealing God’s power over Geb, the Egyptian god of the earth.<\/p>\n<p>4. <em>Flies<\/em> (8:20-32): The Lord made “a clear distinction” between Israel and Egypt when swarms of biting flies (revered as embodying life from death) filled the land and tormented the Egyptians, including Pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>5. <em>Death of Livestock<\/em> (9:1-7): The Egyptians revered cattle as divine, having the power of life and fertility; Amon-Re, the chief god of Egypt, was pictured as a bull. The “hand of the <span>Lord<\/span>” struck them, demonstrating his sovereign power.<\/p>\n<p>6. <em>Festering Boils<\/em> (9:8-12): God struck the Egyptians with this plague of burning sores, which the Egyptian goddess of healing, Sekhmet, was evidently powerless to ameliorate.<\/p>\n<p>7. <em>Hail<\/em> (9:13-35): The Egyptian god Osiris, who represented vegetation, was unable to prevent the Lord from destroying it, because “the earth belongs to the <span>Lord<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>8. <em>Locusts<\/em> (10:1-20): The Lord directed the wind and sent locusts to destroy the last of the vegetation, and with it any hope in Osiris to restore Egypt’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>9. <em>Darkness<\/em> (10:21-29): The Lord demonstrated complete, sovereign control over Re, the sun god and king of the Egyptian gods, considered the father of mankind. No power in Egypt could stand against the Lord and his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>10. <em>Death of the Firstborn<\/em> (11:1–12:30): The Lord took away life itself—which the Egyptians revered above all else—from the heir of every family in Egypt, while preserving and rescuing Israel through the blood sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Yahweh demonstrated to both the Egyptians and the Israelites that he alone is God.<\/p>\n<p>The plagues are often referred to as “signs,” just as Jesus’ miracles were (e.g., 7:3; 10:1-2; John 2:23; 4:48; 12:37). The plagues show that worshiping created things brings God’s judgment. Jesus’ miracles, on the other hand, show that all that is deadly in creation—illness, the demonic, nature run amok, and even death itself—can be overcome by God’s gift of life.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:15-20; 20:1-18; Exod 7:3-5; 7:14–11:1012:28-33; 32:35; Num 11:33; 12:1-15; 16:43-50; 1 Kgs 13:4; 2 Kgs 2:24; 2 Chr 26:16-21; Acts 5:1-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Plagues<\/h3>\n<p>Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may have believed about God when they arrived in Egypt, they were certainly infected with the prevailing pagan views during their sojourn there (see Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues revealed the Lord’s absolute superiority over everything in creation. These cataclysmic events were specifically aimed at elements the Egyptians revered and worshiped:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>The Nile Turned to Blood<\/em> (7:14-25): The Nile, revered as a god who gave Egypt life and fertility, became a bloody representation of death.<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Frogs<\/em> (8:1-15): The Egyptians revered frogs (represented by Heqet, frog-headed goddess of fruitfulness) as having the key of life beyond death. Now frogs filled the land with the stink of death.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Gnats<\/em> (8:16-19): The “finger of God” fell on the land with a plague of biting insects that came from the earth, revealing God’s power over Geb, the Egyptian god of the earth.<\/p>\n<p>4. <em>Flies<\/em> (8:20-32): The Lord made “a clear distinction” between Israel and Egypt when swarms of biting flies (revered as embodying life from death) filled the land and tormented the Egyptians, including Pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>5. <em>Death of Livestock<\/em> (9:1-7): The Egyptians revered cattle as divine, having the power of life and fertility; Amon-Re, the chief god of Egypt, was pictured as a bull. The “hand of the <span>Lord<\/span>” struck them, demonstrating his sovereign power.<\/p>\n<p>6. <em>Festering Boils<\/em> (9:8-12): God struck the Egyptians with this plague of burning sores, which the Egyptian goddess of healing, Sekhmet, was evidently powerless to ameliorate.<\/p>\n<p>7. <em>Hail<\/em> (9:13-35): The Egyptian god Osiris, who represented vegetation, was unable to prevent the Lord from destroying it, because “the earth belongs to the <span>Lord<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>8. <em>Locusts<\/em> (10:1-20): The Lord directed the wind and sent locusts to destroy the last of the vegetation, and with it any hope in Osiris to restore Egypt’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>9. <em>Darkness<\/em> (10:21-29): The Lord demonstrated complete, sovereign control over Re, the sun god and king of the Egyptian gods, considered the father of mankind. No power in Egypt could stand against the Lord and his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>10. <em>Death of the Firstborn<\/em> (11:1–12:30): The Lord took away life itself—which the Egyptians revered above all else—from the heir of every family in Egypt, while preserving and rescuing Israel through the blood sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Yahweh demonstrated to both the Egyptians and the Israelites that he alone is God.<\/p>\n<p>The plagues are often referred to as “signs,” just as Jesus’ miracles were (e.g., 7:3; 10:1-2; John 2:23; 4:48; 12:37). The plagues show that worshiping created things brings God’s judgment. Jesus’ miracles, on the other hand, show that all that is deadly in creation—illness, the demonic, nature run amok, and even death itself—can be overcome by God’s gift of life.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:15-20; 20:1-18; Exod 7:3-5; 7:14–11:1012:28-33; 32:35; Num 11:33; 12:1-15; 16:43-50; 1 Kgs 13:4; 2 Kgs 2:24; 2 Chr 26:16-21; Acts 5:1-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Plagues Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations. The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may ...","summary_en":"The Plagues Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations. The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65836,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66369,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87935,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Plagues","title_en":"The Plagues","content_ro":"<h3>The Plagues<\/h3>\n<p>Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may have believed about God when they arrived in Egypt, they were certainly infected with the prevailing pagan views during their sojourn there (see Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues revealed the Lord’s absolute superiority over everything in creation. These cataclysmic events were specifically aimed at elements the Egyptians revered and worshiped:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>The Nile Turned to Blood<\/em> (7:14-25): The Nile, revered as a god who gave Egypt life and fertility, became a bloody representation of death.<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Frogs<\/em> (8:1-15): The Egyptians revered frogs (represented by Heqet, frog-headed goddess of fruitfulness) as having the key of life beyond death. Now frogs filled the land with the stink of death.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Gnats<\/em> (8:16-19): The “finger of God” fell on the land with a plague of biting insects that came from the earth, revealing God’s power over Geb, the Egyptian god of the earth.<\/p>\n<p>4. <em>Flies<\/em> (8:20-32): The Lord made “a clear distinction” between Israel and Egypt when swarms of biting flies (revered as embodying life from death) filled the land and tormented the Egyptians, including Pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>5. <em>Death of Livestock<\/em> (9:1-7): The Egyptians revered cattle as divine, having the power of life and fertility; Amon-Re, the chief god of Egypt, was pictured as a bull. The “hand of the <span>Lord<\/span>” struck them, demonstrating his sovereign power.<\/p>\n<p>6. <em>Festering Boils<\/em> (9:8-12): God struck the Egyptians with this plague of burning sores, which the Egyptian goddess of healing, Sekhmet, was evidently powerless to ameliorate.<\/p>\n<p>7. <em>Hail<\/em> (9:13-35): The Egyptian god Osiris, who represented vegetation, was unable to prevent the Lord from destroying it, because “the earth belongs to the <span>Lord<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>8. <em>Locusts<\/em> (10:1-20): The Lord directed the wind and sent locusts to destroy the last of the vegetation, and with it any hope in Osiris to restore Egypt’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>9. <em>Darkness<\/em> (10:21-29): The Lord demonstrated complete, sovereign control over Re, the sun god and king of the Egyptian gods, considered the father of mankind. No power in Egypt could stand against the Lord and his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>10. <em>Death of the Firstborn<\/em> (11:1–12:30): The Lord took away life itself—which the Egyptians revered above all else—from the heir of every family in Egypt, while preserving and rescuing Israel through the blood sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Yahweh demonstrated to both the Egyptians and the Israelites that he alone is God.<\/p>\n<p>The plagues are often referred to as “signs,” just as Jesus’ miracles were (e.g., 7:3; 10:1-2; John 2:23; 4:48; 12:37). The plagues show that worshiping created things brings God’s judgment. Jesus’ miracles, on the other hand, show that all that is deadly in creation—illness, the demonic, nature run amok, and even death itself—can be overcome by God’s gift of life.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:15-20; 20:1-18; Exod 7:3-5; 7:14–11:1012:28-33; 32:35; Num 11:33; 12:1-15; 16:43-50; 1 Kgs 13:4; 2 Kgs 2:24; 2 Chr 26:16-21; Acts 5:1-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Plagues<\/h3>\n<p>Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may have believed about God when they arrived in Egypt, they were certainly infected with the prevailing pagan views during their sojourn there (see Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues revealed the Lord’s absolute superiority over everything in creation. These cataclysmic events were specifically aimed at elements the Egyptians revered and worshiped:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>The Nile Turned to Blood<\/em> (7:14-25): The Nile, revered as a god who gave Egypt life and fertility, became a bloody representation of death.<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Frogs<\/em> (8:1-15): The Egyptians revered frogs (represented by Heqet, frog-headed goddess of fruitfulness) as having the key of life beyond death. Now frogs filled the land with the stink of death.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Gnats<\/em> (8:16-19): The “finger of God” fell on the land with a plague of biting insects that came from the earth, revealing God’s power over Geb, the Egyptian god of the earth.<\/p>\n<p>4. <em>Flies<\/em> (8:20-32): The Lord made “a clear distinction” between Israel and Egypt when swarms of biting flies (revered as embodying life from death) filled the land and tormented the Egyptians, including Pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>5. <em>Death of Livestock<\/em> (9:1-7): The Egyptians revered cattle as divine, having the power of life and fertility; Amon-Re, the chief god of Egypt, was pictured as a bull. The “hand of the <span>Lord<\/span>” struck them, demonstrating his sovereign power.<\/p>\n<p>6. <em>Festering Boils<\/em> (9:8-12): God struck the Egyptians with this plague of burning sores, which the Egyptian goddess of healing, Sekhmet, was evidently powerless to ameliorate.<\/p>\n<p>7. <em>Hail<\/em> (9:13-35): The Egyptian god Osiris, who represented vegetation, was unable to prevent the Lord from destroying it, because “the earth belongs to the <span>Lord<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>8. <em>Locusts<\/em> (10:1-20): The Lord directed the wind and sent locusts to destroy the last of the vegetation, and with it any hope in Osiris to restore Egypt’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>9. <em>Darkness<\/em> (10:21-29): The Lord demonstrated complete, sovereign control over Re, the sun god and king of the Egyptian gods, considered the father of mankind. No power in Egypt could stand against the Lord and his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>10. <em>Death of the Firstborn<\/em> (11:1–12:30): The Lord took away life itself—which the Egyptians revered above all else—from the heir of every family in Egypt, while preserving and rescuing Israel through the blood sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Yahweh demonstrated to both the Egyptians and the Israelites that he alone is God.<\/p>\n<p>The plagues are often referred to as “signs,” just as Jesus’ miracles were (e.g., 7:3; 10:1-2; John 2:23; 4:48; 12:37). The plagues show that worshiping created things brings God’s judgment. Jesus’ miracles, on the other hand, show that all that is deadly in creation—illness, the demonic, nature run amok, and even death itself—can be overcome by God’s gift of life.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:15-20; 20:1-18; Exod 7:3-5; 7:14–11:1012:28-33; 32:35; Num 11:33; 12:1-15; 16:43-50; 1 Kgs 13:4; 2 Kgs 2:24; 2 Chr 26:16-21; Acts 5:1-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Plagues Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations. The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may ...","summary_en":"The Plagues Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations. The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93462,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93995,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115561,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Plagues","title_en":"The Plagues","content_ro":"<h3>The Plagues<\/h3>\n<p>Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may have believed about God when they arrived in Egypt, they were certainly infected with the prevailing pagan views during their sojourn there (see Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues revealed the Lord’s absolute superiority over everything in creation. These cataclysmic events were specifically aimed at elements the Egyptians revered and worshiped:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>The Nile Turned to Blood<\/em> (7:14-25): The Nile, revered as a god who gave Egypt life and fertility, became a bloody representation of death.<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Frogs<\/em> (8:1-15): The Egyptians revered frogs (represented by Heqet, frog-headed goddess of fruitfulness) as having the key of life beyond death. Now frogs filled the land with the stink of death.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Gnats<\/em> (8:16-19): The “finger of God” fell on the land with a plague of biting insects that came from the earth, revealing God’s power over Geb, the Egyptian god of the earth.<\/p>\n<p>4. <em>Flies<\/em> (8:20-32): The Lord made “a clear distinction” between Israel and Egypt when swarms of biting flies (revered as embodying life from death) filled the land and tormented the Egyptians, including Pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>5. <em>Death of Livestock<\/em> (9:1-7): The Egyptians revered cattle as divine, having the power of life and fertility; Amon-Re, the chief god of Egypt, was pictured as a bull. The “hand of the <span>Lord<\/span>” struck them, demonstrating his sovereign power.<\/p>\n<p>6. <em>Festering Boils<\/em> (9:8-12): God struck the Egyptians with this plague of burning sores, which the Egyptian goddess of healing, Sekhmet, was evidently powerless to ameliorate.<\/p>\n<p>7. <em>Hail<\/em> (9:13-35): The Egyptian god Osiris, who represented vegetation, was unable to prevent the Lord from destroying it, because “the earth belongs to the <span>Lord<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>8. <em>Locusts<\/em> (10:1-20): The Lord directed the wind and sent locusts to destroy the last of the vegetation, and with it any hope in Osiris to restore Egypt’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>9. <em>Darkness<\/em> (10:21-29): The Lord demonstrated complete, sovereign control over Re, the sun god and king of the Egyptian gods, considered the father of mankind. No power in Egypt could stand against the Lord and his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>10. <em>Death of the Firstborn<\/em> (11:1–12:30): The Lord took away life itself—which the Egyptians revered above all else—from the heir of every family in Egypt, while preserving and rescuing Israel through the blood sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Yahweh demonstrated to both the Egyptians and the Israelites that he alone is God.<\/p>\n<p>The plagues are often referred to as “signs,” just as Jesus’ miracles were (e.g., 7:3; 10:1-2; John 2:23; 4:48; 12:37). The plagues show that worshiping created things brings God’s judgment. Jesus’ miracles, on the other hand, show that all that is deadly in creation—illness, the demonic, nature run amok, and even death itself—can be overcome by God’s gift of life.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:15-20; 20:1-18; Exod 7:3-5; 7:14–11:1012:28-33; 32:35; Num 11:33; 12:1-15; 16:43-50; 1 Kgs 13:4; 2 Kgs 2:24; 2 Chr 26:16-21; Acts 5:1-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Plagues<\/h3>\n<p>Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may have believed about God when they arrived in Egypt, they were certainly infected with the prevailing pagan views during their sojourn there (see Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues revealed the Lord’s absolute superiority over everything in creation. These cataclysmic events were specifically aimed at elements the Egyptians revered and worshiped:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>The Nile Turned to Blood<\/em> (7:14-25): The Nile, revered as a god who gave Egypt life and fertility, became a bloody representation of death.<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Frogs<\/em> (8:1-15): The Egyptians revered frogs (represented by Heqet, frog-headed goddess of fruitfulness) as having the key of life beyond death. Now frogs filled the land with the stink of death.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Gnats<\/em> (8:16-19): The “finger of God” fell on the land with a plague of biting insects that came from the earth, revealing God’s power over Geb, the Egyptian god of the earth.<\/p>\n<p>4. <em>Flies<\/em> (8:20-32): The Lord made “a clear distinction” between Israel and Egypt when swarms of biting flies (revered as embodying life from death) filled the land and tormented the Egyptians, including Pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>5. <em>Death of Livestock<\/em> (9:1-7): The Egyptians revered cattle as divine, having the power of life and fertility; Amon-Re, the chief god of Egypt, was pictured as a bull. The “hand of the <span>Lord<\/span>” struck them, demonstrating his sovereign power.<\/p>\n<p>6. <em>Festering Boils<\/em> (9:8-12): God struck the Egyptians with this plague of burning sores, which the Egyptian goddess of healing, Sekhmet, was evidently powerless to ameliorate.<\/p>\n<p>7. <em>Hail<\/em> (9:13-35): The Egyptian god Osiris, who represented vegetation, was unable to prevent the Lord from destroying it, because “the earth belongs to the <span>Lord<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>8. <em>Locusts<\/em> (10:1-20): The Lord directed the wind and sent locusts to destroy the last of the vegetation, and with it any hope in Osiris to restore Egypt’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>9. <em>Darkness<\/em> (10:21-29): The Lord demonstrated complete, sovereign control over Re, the sun god and king of the Egyptian gods, considered the father of mankind. No power in Egypt could stand against the Lord and his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>10. <em>Death of the Firstborn<\/em> (11:1–12:30): The Lord took away life itself—which the Egyptians revered above all else—from the heir of every family in Egypt, while preserving and rescuing Israel through the blood sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Yahweh demonstrated to both the Egyptians and the Israelites that he alone is God.<\/p>\n<p>The plagues are often referred to as “signs,” just as Jesus’ miracles were (e.g., 7:3; 10:1-2; John 2:23; 4:48; 12:37). The plagues show that worshiping created things brings God’s judgment. Jesus’ miracles, on the other hand, show that all that is deadly in creation—illness, the demonic, nature run amok, and even death itself—can be overcome by God’s gift of life.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:15-20; 20:1-18; Exod 7:3-5; 7:14–11:1012:28-33; 32:35; Num 11:33; 12:1-15; 16:43-50; 1 Kgs 13:4; 2 Kgs 2:24; 2 Chr 26:16-21; Acts 5:1-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Plagues Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations. The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may ...","summary_en":"The Plagues Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations. The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121088,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121621,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143187,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Plagues","title_en":"The Plagues","content_ro":"<h3>The Plagues<\/h3>\n<p>Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may have believed about God when they arrived in Egypt, they were certainly infected with the prevailing pagan views during their sojourn there (see Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues revealed the Lord’s absolute superiority over everything in creation. These cataclysmic events were specifically aimed at elements the Egyptians revered and worshiped:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>The Nile Turned to Blood<\/em> (7:14-25): The Nile, revered as a god who gave Egypt life and fertility, became a bloody representation of death.<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Frogs<\/em> (8:1-15): The Egyptians revered frogs (represented by Heqet, frog-headed goddess of fruitfulness) as having the key of life beyond death. Now frogs filled the land with the stink of death.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Gnats<\/em> (8:16-19): The “finger of God” fell on the land with a plague of biting insects that came from the earth, revealing God’s power over Geb, the Egyptian god of the earth.<\/p>\n<p>4. <em>Flies<\/em> (8:20-32): The Lord made “a clear distinction” between Israel and Egypt when swarms of biting flies (revered as embodying life from death) filled the land and tormented the Egyptians, including Pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>5. <em>Death of Livestock<\/em> (9:1-7): The Egyptians revered cattle as divine, having the power of life and fertility; Amon-Re, the chief god of Egypt, was pictured as a bull. The “hand of the <span>Lord<\/span>” struck them, demonstrating his sovereign power.<\/p>\n<p>6. <em>Festering Boils<\/em> (9:8-12): God struck the Egyptians with this plague of burning sores, which the Egyptian goddess of healing, Sekhmet, was evidently powerless to ameliorate.<\/p>\n<p>7. <em>Hail<\/em> (9:13-35): The Egyptian god Osiris, who represented vegetation, was unable to prevent the Lord from destroying it, because “the earth belongs to the <span>Lord<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>8. <em>Locusts<\/em> (10:1-20): The Lord directed the wind and sent locusts to destroy the last of the vegetation, and with it any hope in Osiris to restore Egypt’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>9. <em>Darkness<\/em> (10:21-29): The Lord demonstrated complete, sovereign control over Re, the sun god and king of the Egyptian gods, considered the father of mankind. No power in Egypt could stand against the Lord and his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>10. <em>Death of the Firstborn<\/em> (11:1–12:30): The Lord took away life itself—which the Egyptians revered above all else—from the heir of every family in Egypt, while preserving and rescuing Israel through the blood sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Yahweh demonstrated to both the Egyptians and the Israelites that he alone is God.<\/p>\n<p>The plagues are often referred to as “signs,” just as Jesus’ miracles were (e.g., 7:3; 10:1-2; John 2:23; 4:48; 12:37). The plagues show that worshiping created things brings God’s judgment. Jesus’ miracles, on the other hand, show that all that is deadly in creation—illness, the demonic, nature run amok, and even death itself—can be overcome by God’s gift of life.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:15-20; 20:1-18; Exod 7:3-5; 7:14–11:1012:28-33; 32:35; Num 11:33; 12:1-15; 16:43-50; 1 Kgs 13:4; 2 Kgs 2:24; 2 Chr 26:16-21; Acts 5:1-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Plagues<\/h3>\n<p>Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may have believed about God when they arrived in Egypt, they were certainly infected with the prevailing pagan views during their sojourn there (see Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues revealed the Lord’s absolute superiority over everything in creation. These cataclysmic events were specifically aimed at elements the Egyptians revered and worshiped:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>The Nile Turned to Blood<\/em> (7:14-25): The Nile, revered as a god who gave Egypt life and fertility, became a bloody representation of death.<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Frogs<\/em> (8:1-15): The Egyptians revered frogs (represented by Heqet, frog-headed goddess of fruitfulness) as having the key of life beyond death. Now frogs filled the land with the stink of death.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Gnats<\/em> (8:16-19): The “finger of God” fell on the land with a plague of biting insects that came from the earth, revealing God’s power over Geb, the Egyptian god of the earth.<\/p>\n<p>4. <em>Flies<\/em> (8:20-32): The Lord made “a clear distinction” between Israel and Egypt when swarms of biting flies (revered as embodying life from death) filled the land and tormented the Egyptians, including Pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>5. <em>Death of Livestock<\/em> (9:1-7): The Egyptians revered cattle as divine, having the power of life and fertility; Amon-Re, the chief god of Egypt, was pictured as a bull. The “hand of the <span>Lord<\/span>” struck them, demonstrating his sovereign power.<\/p>\n<p>6. <em>Festering Boils<\/em> (9:8-12): God struck the Egyptians with this plague of burning sores, which the Egyptian goddess of healing, Sekhmet, was evidently powerless to ameliorate.<\/p>\n<p>7. <em>Hail<\/em> (9:13-35): The Egyptian god Osiris, who represented vegetation, was unable to prevent the Lord from destroying it, because “the earth belongs to the <span>Lord<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>8. <em>Locusts<\/em> (10:1-20): The Lord directed the wind and sent locusts to destroy the last of the vegetation, and with it any hope in Osiris to restore Egypt’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>9. <em>Darkness<\/em> (10:21-29): The Lord demonstrated complete, sovereign control over Re, the sun god and king of the Egyptian gods, considered the father of mankind. No power in Egypt could stand against the Lord and his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>10. <em>Death of the Firstborn<\/em> (11:1–12:30): The Lord took away life itself—which the Egyptians revered above all else—from the heir of every family in Egypt, while preserving and rescuing Israel through the blood sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Yahweh demonstrated to both the Egyptians and the Israelites that he alone is God.<\/p>\n<p>The plagues are often referred to as “signs,” just as Jesus’ miracles were (e.g., 7:3; 10:1-2; John 2:23; 4:48; 12:37). The plagues show that worshiping created things brings God’s judgment. Jesus’ miracles, on the other hand, show that all that is deadly in creation—illness, the demonic, nature run amok, and even death itself—can be overcome by God’s gift of life.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:15-20; 20:1-18; Exod 7:3-5; 7:14–11:1012:28-33; 32:35; Num 11:33; 12:1-15; 16:43-50; 1 Kgs 13:4; 2 Kgs 2:24; 2 Chr 26:16-21; Acts 5:1-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Plagues Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations. The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may ...","summary_en":"The Plagues Rescuing the Hebrew people from oppression by the Egyptians was not the main purpose of the plagues. If that had been the case, one climactic miracle would have been sufficient. The real purpose of the plagues was to communicate who God is—to Israel, to Egypt, and to the surrounding nations. The Israelites had likely lost sight of who God was. They had lived for hundreds of years in Egypt, one of the most polytheistic cultures the world has ever known. Whatever the Israelites may ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148714,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149247,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":56351,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:24<\/strong> John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but <em>Jesus didn’t trust them<\/em>. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:24<\/strong> John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but <em>Jesus didn’t trust them<\/em>. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:24 John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but Jesus didn’t trust them. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.","summary_en":"2:24 John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but Jesus didn’t trust them. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83977,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:24<\/strong> John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but <em>Jesus didn’t trust them<\/em>. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:24<\/strong> John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but <em>Jesus didn’t trust them<\/em>. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:24 John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but Jesus didn’t trust them. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.","summary_en":"2:24 John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but Jesus didn’t trust them. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111603,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:24<\/strong> John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but <em>Jesus didn’t trust them<\/em>. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:24<\/strong> John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but <em>Jesus didn’t trust them<\/em>. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:24 John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but Jesus didn’t trust them. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.","summary_en":"2:24 John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but Jesus didn’t trust them. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139229,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 2:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 2:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:24<\/strong> John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but <em>Jesus didn’t trust them<\/em>. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>2:24<\/strong> John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but <em>Jesus didn’t trust them<\/em>. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:24 John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but Jesus didn’t trust them. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.","summary_en":"2:24 John uses a play on words here. Because of his signs, many people trusted in Jesus (2:23), but Jesus didn’t trust them. This did not refer to specific people Jesus met in Jerusalem, but reflects his knowledge of all humanity.","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"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Ioan 2
— 25 versete
Ioan 2
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse