Ioan 3
1 Între Farisei era un om cu numele Nicodim, un fruntaş al Iudeilor.
2 Acesta a venit la Isus, noaptea, şi I-a zis: ,,Învăţătorule, ştim că eşti un Învăţător, venit dela Dumnezeu; căci nimeni nu poate face semnele pe cari le faci Tu, dacă nu este Dumnezeu cu el.``
3 Drept răspuns, Isus i-a zis: ,,Adevărat, adevărat îţi spun că, dacă un om nu se naşte din nou, nu poate vedea Împărăţia lui Dumnezeu.``
4 Nicodim I-a zis: ,,Cum se poate naşte un om bătrân? Poate el să intre a doua oară în pântecele maicii sale, şi să se nască?``
5 Isus i-a răspuns: ,,Adevărat, adevărat îţi spun, că, dacă nu se naşte cineva din apă şi din Duh, nu poate să intre în Împărăţia lui Dumnezeu.
6 Ce este născut din carne, este carne, şi ce este născut din Duh, este duh.
7 Nu te mira că ţi-am zis: ,,Trebuie să vă naşteţi din nou.
8 Vântul suflă încotro vrea, şi-i auzi vuietul; dar nu ştii de unde vine, nici încotro merge. Tot aşa este cu oricine este născut din Duhul.``
9 Nicodim I-a zis: ,,Cum se poate face aşa ceva?``
10 Isus I-a răspuns: ,,Tu eşti învăţătorul lui Israel, şi nu pricepi aceste lucruri?
11 Adevărat, adevărat îţi spun, că noi vorbim ce ştim, şi mărturisim ce am văzut; şi voi nu primiţi mărturia noastră.
12 Dacă v-am vorbit despre lucruri pământeşti şi nu credeţi, cum veţi crede când vă voi vorbi despre lucrurile cereşti?
13 Nimeni nu s-a suit în cer, afară de Cel ce S-a pogorât din cer, adică Fiul omului, care este în cer.
14 Şi, după cum a înălţat Moise şarpele în pustie, tot aşa trebuie să fie înălţat şi Fiul omului,
15 pentruca oricine crede în El să nu piară, ci să aibă viaţa vecinică.
16 Fiindcă atât de mult a iubit Dumnezeu lumea, că a dat pe singurul Lui Fiu, pentruca oricine crede în El, să nu piară, ci să aibă viaţa vecinică.
17 Dumnezeu, în adevăr, n-a trimes pe Fiul Său în lume ca să judece lumea, ci ca lumea să fie mântuită prin El.
18 Oricine crede în El, nu este judecat; dar cine nu crede, a şi fost judecat, pentrucă n-a crezut în Numele singurului Fiu al lui Dumnezeu.
19 Şi judecata aceasta stă în faptul că, odată venită Lumina în lume, oamenii au iubit mai mult întunerecul decât lumina, pentrucă faptele lor erau rele.
20 Căci oricine face răul, urăşte lumina, şi nu vine la lumină, ca să nu i se vădească faptele.
21 Dar cine lucrează după adevăr, vine la lumină, pentruca să i se arate faptele, fiindcă sânt făcute în Dumnezeu.``
22 După aceea Isus, şi ucenicii Lui, a venit în ţinutul Iudeii; şi stătea acolo cu ei şi boteza.
23 Ioan boteza şi el în Enon, aproape de Salim, pentrucă acolo erau multe ape; şi oamenii veneau ca să fie botezaţi.
24 Căci Ioan încă nu fusese aruncat în temniţă.
25 Între ucenicii lui Ioan şi între un Iudeu, s-a iscat o neânţelegere cu privire la curăţire.
26 Au venit deci la Ioan şi i-au zis: ,,Învăţătorule, Celce era cu tine dincolo de Iordan, şi despre care ai mărturisit tu, iată că botează, şi toţi oameni se duc la El.``
27 Drept răspuns, Ioan i-a zis: ,,Omul nu poate primi decât ce-i este dat din cer.
28 Voi înşivă îmi sânteţi martori că am zis: ,,Nu sânt eu Hristosul, ci sânt trimes înaintea Lui.
29 Cine are mireasă, este mire; dar prietenul mirelui, care stă şi-l ascultă, se bucură foarte mult când aude glasul mirelui: şi această bucurie, care este a mea, este deplină.
30 Trebuie ca El să crească, iar eu să mă micşorez.
31 Celce vine din cer, este mai pe sus de toţi; celce este depe pământ, este pământesc, şi vorbeşte ca de pe pământ. Celce vine din cer, este mai pe sus de toţi.
32 El mărturiseşte ce a văzut şi a auzit, şi totuş nimeni nu primeşte mărturia Lui.
33 Cine primeşte mărturia Lui, adevereşte prin aceasta că Dumnezeu spune adevărul.
34 Căci Acela, pe care L-a trimes Dumnezeu, vorbeşte cuvintele lui Dumnezeu, pentrucă Dumnezeu nu -I dă Duhul cu măsură.
35 Tatăl iubeşte pe Fiul, şi a dat toate lucrurile în mâna Lui.
36 Cine crede în Fiul, are viaţa vecinică; dar cine nu crede în Fiul, nu va vedea viaţa, ci mânia lui Dumnezeu rămâne peste el.``
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":42070,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42444,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nicodemus","title_en":"Nicodemus","content_ro":"<h3>Nicodemus<\/h3>\n<p>Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n<p>Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not give us Nicodemus’s response.<\/p>\n<p>Later, however, in opposition to his colleagues on the Jewish high council, he strongly argued that Jesus should be given a fair trial (John 7:50-51). After Jesus was crucified, he bought seventy-five pounds of expensive perfumed ointment for his burial, took it to the tomb, and assisted Joseph of Arimathea in burying him (John 19:39-42). Thus, Nicodemus appears to be an example of a Pharisee who came to believe in Jesus and was willing to express that commitment publicly after his death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 3:1-9; 7:50; 19:39-42<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nicodemus<\/h3>\n<p>Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n<p>Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not give us Nicodemus’s response.<\/p>\n<p>Later, however, in opposition to his colleagues on the Jewish high council, he strongly argued that Jesus should be given a fair trial (John 7:50-51). After Jesus was crucified, he bought seventy-five pounds of expensive perfumed ointment for his burial, took it to the tomb, and assisted Joseph of Arimathea in burying him (John 19:39-42). Thus, Nicodemus appears to be an example of a Pharisee who came to believe in Jesus and was willing to express that commitment publicly after his death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 3:1-9; 7:50; 19:39-42<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nicodemus Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John. Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not ...","summary_en":"Nicodemus Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John. Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69696,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70070,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nicodemus","title_en":"Nicodemus","content_ro":"<h3>Nicodemus<\/h3>\n<p>Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n<p>Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not give us Nicodemus’s response.<\/p>\n<p>Later, however, in opposition to his colleagues on the Jewish high council, he strongly argued that Jesus should be given a fair trial (John 7:50-51). After Jesus was crucified, he bought seventy-five pounds of expensive perfumed ointment for his burial, took it to the tomb, and assisted Joseph of Arimathea in burying him (John 19:39-42). Thus, Nicodemus appears to be an example of a Pharisee who came to believe in Jesus and was willing to express that commitment publicly after his death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 3:1-9; 7:50; 19:39-42<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nicodemus<\/h3>\n<p>Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n<p>Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not give us Nicodemus’s response.<\/p>\n<p>Later, however, in opposition to his colleagues on the Jewish high council, he strongly argued that Jesus should be given a fair trial (John 7:50-51). After Jesus was crucified, he bought seventy-five pounds of expensive perfumed ointment for his burial, took it to the tomb, and assisted Joseph of Arimathea in burying him (John 19:39-42). Thus, Nicodemus appears to be an example of a Pharisee who came to believe in Jesus and was willing to express that commitment publicly after his death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 3:1-9; 7:50; 19:39-42<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nicodemus Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John. Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not ...","summary_en":"Nicodemus Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John. Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97322,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97696,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nicodemus","title_en":"Nicodemus","content_ro":"<h3>Nicodemus<\/h3>\n<p>Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n<p>Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not give us Nicodemus’s response.<\/p>\n<p>Later, however, in opposition to his colleagues on the Jewish high council, he strongly argued that Jesus should be given a fair trial (John 7:50-51). After Jesus was crucified, he bought seventy-five pounds of expensive perfumed ointment for his burial, took it to the tomb, and assisted Joseph of Arimathea in burying him (John 19:39-42). Thus, Nicodemus appears to be an example of a Pharisee who came to believe in Jesus and was willing to express that commitment publicly after his death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 3:1-9; 7:50; 19:39-42<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nicodemus<\/h3>\n<p>Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n<p>Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not give us Nicodemus’s response.<\/p>\n<p>Later, however, in opposition to his colleagues on the Jewish high council, he strongly argued that Jesus should be given a fair trial (John 7:50-51). After Jesus was crucified, he bought seventy-five pounds of expensive perfumed ointment for his burial, took it to the tomb, and assisted Joseph of Arimathea in burying him (John 19:39-42). Thus, Nicodemus appears to be an example of a Pharisee who came to believe in Jesus and was willing to express that commitment publicly after his death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 3:1-9; 7:50; 19:39-42<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nicodemus Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John. Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not ...","summary_en":"Nicodemus Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John. Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124948,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125322,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Nicodemus","title_en":"Nicodemus","content_ro":"<h3>Nicodemus<\/h3>\n<p>Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n<p>Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not give us Nicodemus’s response.<\/p>\n<p>Later, however, in opposition to his colleagues on the Jewish high council, he strongly argued that Jesus should be given a fair trial (John 7:50-51). After Jesus was crucified, he bought seventy-five pounds of expensive perfumed ointment for his burial, took it to the tomb, and assisted Joseph of Arimathea in burying him (John 19:39-42). Thus, Nicodemus appears to be an example of a Pharisee who came to believe in Jesus and was willing to express that commitment publicly after his death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 3:1-9; 7:50; 19:39-42<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Nicodemus<\/h3>\n<p>Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n<p>Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not give us Nicodemus’s response.<\/p>\n<p>Later, however, in opposition to his colleagues on the Jewish high council, he strongly argued that Jesus should be given a fair trial (John 7:50-51). After Jesus was crucified, he bought seventy-five pounds of expensive perfumed ointment for his burial, took it to the tomb, and assisted Joseph of Arimathea in burying him (John 19:39-42). Thus, Nicodemus appears to be an example of a Pharisee who came to believe in Jesus and was willing to express that commitment publicly after his death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 3:1-9; 7:50; 19:39-42<\/p>","summary_ro":"Nicodemus Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John. Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not ...","summary_en":"Nicodemus Nicodemus was a highly respected Jewish Pharisee (John 3:1), one of the prominent members of the high council, who appears to have become a convert of Jesus. He is mentioned only in the Gospel of John. Intrigued by the authority of Jesus and the miracles he was doing, Nicodemus went to see him secretly, at night, in an attempt to discover who he really was. Jesus challenged him with the need to be born again if he wished to be in the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-8). The Gospel does not ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19444,"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":20184,"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":27526,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nicodemus","title_en":"Nicodemus","content_ro":"<h3>NICODEMUS<\/h3>\n<p>Pharisee and member of the Sanhedrin mentioned only in John’s Gospel (Jn 3:1-15; 7:50-52; 19:39-41). According to John 3, Nicodemus came to Jesus at night and acknowledged him as a teacher sent by God. He was convinced that Jesus could not perform such things if God were not with him. Following an exchange concerning the need to be born again, Jesus asked how Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish religious court, could fail to understand such things. At that time he evidently made no profession of faith, but later he did defend Jesus before the Sanhedrin (7:50-52). After Jesus’ death, Nicodemus openly assisted Joseph of Arimathea with the burial of his body (19:39-42).<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars suggest that Nicodemus was one of the Jewish leaders who believed in Jesus but did not confess him openly for fear of excommunication (12:42). Tradition subsequently held that he belonged to the household of faith, as one persuaded to believe through the message and deeds of Jesus, but remained intimidated by the religious establishment.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, Gospel of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NICODEMUS<\/h3>\n<p>Pharisee and member of the Sanhedrin mentioned only in John’s Gospel (Jn 3:1-15; 7:50-52; 19:39-41). According to John 3, Nicodemus came to Jesus at night and acknowledged him as a teacher sent by God. He was convinced that Jesus could not perform such things if God were not with him. Following an exchange concerning the need to be born again, Jesus asked how Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish religious court, could fail to understand such things. At that time he evidently made no profession of faith, but later he did defend Jesus before the Sanhedrin (7:50-52). After Jesus’ death, Nicodemus openly assisted Joseph of Arimathea with the burial of his body (19:39-42).<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars suggest that Nicodemus was one of the Jewish leaders who believed in Jesus but did not confess him openly for fear of excommunication (12:42). Tradition subsequently held that he belonged to the household of faith, as one persuaded to believe through the message and deeds of Jesus, but remained intimidated by the religious establishment.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, Gospel of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NICODEMUS Pharisee and member of the Sanhedrin mentioned only in John’s Gospel (Jn 3:1-15; 7:50-52; 19:39-41). According to John 3, Nicodemus came to Jesus at night and acknowledged him as a teacher sent by God. He was convinced that Jesus could not perform such things if God were not with him. Following an exchange concerning the need to be born again, Jesus asked how Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish religious court, could fail to understand such things. At that time he evidently made no pr...","summary_en":"NICODEMUS Pharisee and member of the Sanhedrin mentioned only in John’s Gospel (Jn 3:1-15; 7:50-52; 19:39-41). According to John 3, Nicodemus came to Jesus at night and acknowledged him as a teacher sent by God. He was convinced that Jesus could not perform such things if God were not with him. Following an exchange concerning the need to be born again, Jesus asked how Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish religious court, could fail to understand such things. At that time he evidently made no pr...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33351,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ruler","title_en":"Ruler","content_ro":"<h3>RULER<\/h3>\n<p>The term represents a number of different functions and translates 13 Hebrew and 3 Greek words. In a political sense, a ruler was one who exercised political control over a state (2 Chr 7:18; Ps 105:20; Prv 23:1; 28:15; Eccl 10:4; Is 14:5; 16:1; 49:7; Jer 33:26; 51:46; Mi 5:2), or a state that exercised control over a subject people (Jgs 15:11). The usual term for ruler was “king,” but because of its unsavory associations, many in Israel preferred the Hebrew term translated “leader,” meaning “one placed in front.” For example, Samuel rejected the former term but used the latter (1 Sm 9:16; 10:1; 13:14; 25:30; 2 Sm 5:2; 6:21; 7:8). Other Hebrew words are translated “ruler” in the <span>kjv<\/span>. However, most modern translations prefer alternatives to this more generic term.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the Greek word regularly translated “ruler” refers to administrative or religious leaders (in various modern versions, see Mt 9:18, 23; Lk 8:41; 18:18; 23:35; 24:20; Jn 3:1; 7:26, 48; 12:31; Acts 3:17; 4:5, 26; 7:27, 35; 13:27; 14:5; 16:19; 23:5; Rom 13:3). Ephesians 6:12 mentions the rulers of the darkness of this world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> King.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RULER<\/h3>\n<p>The term represents a number of different functions and translates 13 Hebrew and 3 Greek words. In a political sense, a ruler was one who exercised political control over a state (2 Chr 7:18; Ps 105:20; Prv 23:1; 28:15; Eccl 10:4; Is 14:5; 16:1; 49:7; Jer 33:26; 51:46; Mi 5:2), or a state that exercised control over a subject people (Jgs 15:11). The usual term for ruler was “king,” but because of its unsavory associations, many in Israel preferred the Hebrew term translated “leader,” meaning “one placed in front.” For example, Samuel rejected the former term but used the latter (1 Sm 9:16; 10:1; 13:14; 25:30; 2 Sm 5:2; 6:21; 7:8). Other Hebrew words are translated “ruler” in the <span>kjv<\/span>. However, most modern translations prefer alternatives to this more generic term.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the Greek word regularly translated “ruler” refers to administrative or religious leaders (in various modern versions, see Mt 9:18, 23; Lk 8:41; 18:18; 23:35; 24:20; Jn 3:1; 7:26, 48; 12:31; Acts 3:17; 4:5, 26; 7:27, 35; 13:27; 14:5; 16:19; 23:5; Rom 13:3). Ephesians 6:12 mentions the rulers of the darkness of this world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> King.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RULER The term represents a number of different functions and translates 13 Hebrew and 3 Greek words. In a political sense, a ruler was one who exercised political control over a state (2 Chr 7:18; Ps 105:20; Prv 23:1; 28:15; Eccl 10:4; Is 14:5; 16:1; 49:7; Jer 33:26; 51:46; Mi 5:2), or a state that exercised control over a subject people (Jgs 15:11). The usual term for ruler was “king,” but because of its unsavory associations, many in Israel preferred the Hebrew term translated “leader,” me...","summary_en":"RULER The term represents a number of different functions and translates 13 Hebrew and 3 Greek words. In a political sense, a ruler was one who exercised political control over a state (2 Chr 7:18; Ps 105:20; Prv 23:1; 28:15; Eccl 10:4; Is 14:5; 16:1; 49:7; Jer 33:26; 51:46; Mi 5:2), or a state that exercised control over a subject people (Jgs 15:11). The usual term for ruler was “king,” but because of its unsavory associations, many in Israel preferred the Hebrew term translated “leader,” me...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34143,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Scribe","title_en":"Scribe","content_ro":"<h3>SCRIBE<\/h3>\n<p>Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPreexilicTimes\">Scribes in Preexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion of the term “scribe” and has no particular religious connotation. Scribes were employed to keep accounts or transcribe legal information (Jer 32:12), military data (2 Chr 26:11), other public documents (Jgs 8:14; Is 50:1), or personal correspondence (Jer 36:18). These secretaries were essential to royal administrations, and there is frequent mention of a chief scribe who functioned as a court recorder (1 Kgs 4:3; 2 Chr 24:11), adviser (2 Sm 8:16-17; 2 Kgs 18:18; 22:12; 1 Chr 27:32; Is 36:3), and financial overseer (2 Kgs 22:3-4). Secretaries or scribes were associated with the priesthood as well, serving as recorders for temple affairs (1 Chr 24:6; 2 Chr 34:13-15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPostexilicTimes\">Scribes in Postexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>With the restoration of Judaism under Ezra and Nehemiah, the term “scribe” begins to be associated more narrowly with those who gathered together, studied, and interpreted the Torah (Jewish law). They became, in essence, a separate profession of teachers (although unpaid), able to preserve accurately the law of Moses and interpret it to meet conditions in postexilic times. In this initial period, Ezra himself appears as the ideal “scribe who studied and taught the commands and laws of the <span>Lord<\/span> to Israel” (Ezr 7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). In Ecclesiasticus, the scribe is portrayed as one who, because of his diligent study of the Law, the Prophets, and Writings (Ecclus 38:24ff; 39:1), is able to penetrate the hidden meanings of texts (39:2-3) and thus is able to serve as judge and counsel for the affairs of the people and state (38:33; 39:4-8). Because of his invaluable place in a society governed by the Torah, the scribe is worthy of praise and veneration throughout succeeding generations (39:9). By the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the scribes were a fairly distinct class in Jewish society. They appear as such during the Maccabean wars, acting as a negotiating body with the rival Syrians (1 Macc 7:12). It is also significant that, from this time forward, the history of the scribe in Jewish life is closely linked with the rise of the Pharisees. Although there were apparently some scribes affiliated with the rival Sadducean party, the party of the Pharisees, with its absolute devotion to the law (including the oral law), became the primary religiopolitical affiliation for the scribes (see the close connection in the NT: Mt 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; Mk 7:5; Lk 6:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TrainingandStatus\">Training and Status<\/p>\n<p>The training of scribes initially occurred within priestly family-based guilds that guaranteed the regulation and perpetuation of this position (1 Chr 2:55). Later, scribal training in the law became open to members of all classes, with the eventual result, by Jesus’ time, of scribes from nonpriestly families being far more numerous and influential. Training in the law began at an early age under the personal supervision of a teacher (rabbi), who gave instructions in all matters pertaining to the law and its interpretation for present needs. Because the written law of Moses could not possibly speak directly to conditions in postexilic times, the oral interpretation and application of the written law to meet such current needs was a significant contribution by the scribes. Such oral law promulgated by them was regarded as equal to the written law and equally binding for those desiring to please God (see Mk 7:6-13). This important function, lying at the heart of Jewish life, accounts for the participation of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in order to make legal decisions in keeping with the law, obviously needed the presence of those most knowledgeable about the minutest details of the Torah and the principles governing its application to new circumstances. The scribes, consequently, were the only members outside the aristocratic high priests and elders to be represented in this Jewish supreme court (Mt 26:57; Mk 14:43, 53; Lk 22:66; Acts 23:9). Being the authoritative instructors of the law both within the temple (Lk 2:46) and within the various synagogues of Judea and Galilee (5:17), as well as prominent members of the Sanhedrin, the scribes were greatly respected within the Jewish community. They wore special robes (Mk 12:38) with memorial fringes at the bottom and phylacteries, or “prayer boxes,” hanging from the arms (Mt 23:5). Such attire made their presence obvious and occasioned the rising or bowing of the common people when they passed (Mk 12:38). They were addressed with respect as “rabbi” or “master” (Mt 23:7) and were given the place of honor at worship as well as at social affairs (Mt 23:2; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46). Indeed, the high regard the Jews held for their scribes is testified by the fact that such teachers of the law were buried alongside the tombs of the patriarchs and prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheScribesinJesusDay\">The Scribes in Jesus’ Day<\/p>\n<p>The scribes appear predominantly in the ministry of Jesus as those concerned with the circumspectness of legal observance. Luke refers to the scribes as “lawyers,” thereby describing their chief function as interpreters of the Jewish law in a way that communicated to his gentile audience. It is often found, therefore, that the scribes were critical members of Jesus’ audience, accusing him of violating the law on numerous occasions: in forgiving sins (Mt 9:1-3; Lk 5:17-26), in breaking their notion of Sabbath observance through work (Lk 6:1-2) and healing (vv 6-11), in not following their accepted ceremonial washings (Mk 7:2-5), and in ignoring their practice of fasting (Lk 5:33-39). Not surprisingly, they especially disapproved of Jesus’ practice of mingling with the unclean and outcasts of Jewish society (Mk 2:16-17; Lk 15:1-2). In a similar light, they are not unfrequently found presenting questions concerning the law for the purpose of tricking Jesus (Mk 7:5; 12:28, 35; Lk 11:53; Jn 8:3-4). In a similar fashion, they demanded that Jesus make his identity clear (Mt 12:38) and reveal the source of his authority to perform miracles (Mk 3:22; Lk 20:1-4). Although there is evidence that a minority of the scribes accepted Jesus (Mt 8:19; 13:52; Mk 12:32; Jn 3:1-2), their primary attitude toward Jesus was one of hostility. As previously suggested, this was partly due to Jesus’ differing expression of fidelity to the Mosaic law and his openness toward the outcasts. It was also partly due to the rising popularity of Jesus among the people, which posed a threat to their own authority (Mt 7:29) and to the safety of the city (Mt 21:15; Mk 11:18). Certainly, another major contributing factor of their opposition to Jesus was his exposure of their hypocrisy and corruption. In his rebukes of the scribes and the Pharisees, Jesus openly accused them of catering to public approval (Mt 23:5-7; Mk 12:38-39; Lk 11:43). While appearing to be outwardly correct and holy, they were inwardly corrupt (Mt 23:25-28; Lk 11:39-41). Jesus also attacked the principle of oral law taught by the scribes, which they demanded that the people follow. Jesus charged that the oral law was a “heavy burden” that the scribes themselves did not even bother to follow (Mt 23:2-4, 13-22; Lk 11:46). While emphasizing the minor points of the law, the scribes were also guilty of ignoring the weightier concerns of justice, mercy, and faith (Mt 23:23-24; Mk 12:40; Lk 11:42). Contrary to being the descendants of the prophets, as the scribes held themselves to be, the scribes (Jesus claimed) would have killed the prophets if they had lived in their day (Mt 23:29-36; Lk 20:9-19).<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising to find, therefore, the scribes anxious to get rid of Jesus (Mk 14:1; Lk 11:53). His more flexible interpretation of the law posed a clear threat to their position and authority within the community. The scribes joined forces with their normal opponents (the high priesthood) to engineer Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43). When Jesus appeared before them and the rest of the Sanhedrin, they worked with the other leaders to construct a case against him worthy of death (Mt 26:57-66). When taking Jesus before Herod, they stood by and shouted their accusations with the others (Lk 23:10). Finally, they participated with other members of the Sanhedrin in mocking Jesus on the cross, demanding that Jesus save himself by coming down from the cross (Mt 27:41-43). Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the scribes continued with the other elements of the Sanhedrin to oppose the early Christian church, and they brought about Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 6:12-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Pharisees; Writer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SCRIBE<\/h3>\n<p>Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPreexilicTimes\">Scribes in Preexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion of the term “scribe” and has no particular religious connotation. Scribes were employed to keep accounts or transcribe legal information (Jer 32:12), military data (2 Chr 26:11), other public documents (Jgs 8:14; Is 50:1), or personal correspondence (Jer 36:18). These secretaries were essential to royal administrations, and there is frequent mention of a chief scribe who functioned as a court recorder (1 Kgs 4:3; 2 Chr 24:11), adviser (2 Sm 8:16-17; 2 Kgs 18:18; 22:12; 1 Chr 27:32; Is 36:3), and financial overseer (2 Kgs 22:3-4). Secretaries or scribes were associated with the priesthood as well, serving as recorders for temple affairs (1 Chr 24:6; 2 Chr 34:13-15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPostexilicTimes\">Scribes in Postexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>With the restoration of Judaism under Ezra and Nehemiah, the term “scribe” begins to be associated more narrowly with those who gathered together, studied, and interpreted the Torah (Jewish law). They became, in essence, a separate profession of teachers (although unpaid), able to preserve accurately the law of Moses and interpret it to meet conditions in postexilic times. In this initial period, Ezra himself appears as the ideal “scribe who studied and taught the commands and laws of the <span>Lord<\/span> to Israel” (Ezr 7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). In Ecclesiasticus, the scribe is portrayed as one who, because of his diligent study of the Law, the Prophets, and Writings (Ecclus 38:24ff; 39:1), is able to penetrate the hidden meanings of texts (39:2-3) and thus is able to serve as judge and counsel for the affairs of the people and state (38:33; 39:4-8). Because of his invaluable place in a society governed by the Torah, the scribe is worthy of praise and veneration throughout succeeding generations (39:9). By the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the scribes were a fairly distinct class in Jewish society. They appear as such during the Maccabean wars, acting as a negotiating body with the rival Syrians (1 Macc 7:12). It is also significant that, from this time forward, the history of the scribe in Jewish life is closely linked with the rise of the Pharisees. Although there were apparently some scribes affiliated with the rival Sadducean party, the party of the Pharisees, with its absolute devotion to the law (including the oral law), became the primary religiopolitical affiliation for the scribes (see the close connection in the NT: Mt 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; Mk 7:5; Lk 6:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TrainingandStatus\">Training and Status<\/p>\n<p>The training of scribes initially occurred within priestly family-based guilds that guaranteed the regulation and perpetuation of this position (1 Chr 2:55). Later, scribal training in the law became open to members of all classes, with the eventual result, by Jesus’ time, of scribes from nonpriestly families being far more numerous and influential. Training in the law began at an early age under the personal supervision of a teacher (rabbi), who gave instructions in all matters pertaining to the law and its interpretation for present needs. Because the written law of Moses could not possibly speak directly to conditions in postexilic times, the oral interpretation and application of the written law to meet such current needs was a significant contribution by the scribes. Such oral law promulgated by them was regarded as equal to the written law and equally binding for those desiring to please God (see Mk 7:6-13). This important function, lying at the heart of Jewish life, accounts for the participation of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in order to make legal decisions in keeping with the law, obviously needed the presence of those most knowledgeable about the minutest details of the Torah and the principles governing its application to new circumstances. The scribes, consequently, were the only members outside the aristocratic high priests and elders to be represented in this Jewish supreme court (Mt 26:57; Mk 14:43, 53; Lk 22:66; Acts 23:9). Being the authoritative instructors of the law both within the temple (Lk 2:46) and within the various synagogues of Judea and Galilee (5:17), as well as prominent members of the Sanhedrin, the scribes were greatly respected within the Jewish community. They wore special robes (Mk 12:38) with memorial fringes at the bottom and phylacteries, or “prayer boxes,” hanging from the arms (Mt 23:5). Such attire made their presence obvious and occasioned the rising or bowing of the common people when they passed (Mk 12:38). They were addressed with respect as “rabbi” or “master” (Mt 23:7) and were given the place of honor at worship as well as at social affairs (Mt 23:2; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46). Indeed, the high regard the Jews held for their scribes is testified by the fact that such teachers of the law were buried alongside the tombs of the patriarchs and prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheScribesinJesusDay\">The Scribes in Jesus’ Day<\/p>\n<p>The scribes appear predominantly in the ministry of Jesus as those concerned with the circumspectness of legal observance. Luke refers to the scribes as “lawyers,” thereby describing their chief function as interpreters of the Jewish law in a way that communicated to his gentile audience. It is often found, therefore, that the scribes were critical members of Jesus’ audience, accusing him of violating the law on numerous occasions: in forgiving sins (Mt 9:1-3; Lk 5:17-26), in breaking their notion of Sabbath observance through work (Lk 6:1-2) and healing (vv 6-11), in not following their accepted ceremonial washings (Mk 7:2-5), and in ignoring their practice of fasting (Lk 5:33-39). Not surprisingly, they especially disapproved of Jesus’ practice of mingling with the unclean and outcasts of Jewish society (Mk 2:16-17; Lk 15:1-2). In a similar light, they are not unfrequently found presenting questions concerning the law for the purpose of tricking Jesus (Mk 7:5; 12:28, 35; Lk 11:53; Jn 8:3-4). In a similar fashion, they demanded that Jesus make his identity clear (Mt 12:38) and reveal the source of his authority to perform miracles (Mk 3:22; Lk 20:1-4). Although there is evidence that a minority of the scribes accepted Jesus (Mt 8:19; 13:52; Mk 12:32; Jn 3:1-2), their primary attitude toward Jesus was one of hostility. As previously suggested, this was partly due to Jesus’ differing expression of fidelity to the Mosaic law and his openness toward the outcasts. It was also partly due to the rising popularity of Jesus among the people, which posed a threat to their own authority (Mt 7:29) and to the safety of the city (Mt 21:15; Mk 11:18). Certainly, another major contributing factor of their opposition to Jesus was his exposure of their hypocrisy and corruption. In his rebukes of the scribes and the Pharisees, Jesus openly accused them of catering to public approval (Mt 23:5-7; Mk 12:38-39; Lk 11:43). While appearing to be outwardly correct and holy, they were inwardly corrupt (Mt 23:25-28; Lk 11:39-41). Jesus also attacked the principle of oral law taught by the scribes, which they demanded that the people follow. Jesus charged that the oral law was a “heavy burden” that the scribes themselves did not even bother to follow (Mt 23:2-4, 13-22; Lk 11:46). While emphasizing the minor points of the law, the scribes were also guilty of ignoring the weightier concerns of justice, mercy, and faith (Mt 23:23-24; Mk 12:40; Lk 11:42). Contrary to being the descendants of the prophets, as the scribes held themselves to be, the scribes (Jesus claimed) would have killed the prophets if they had lived in their day (Mt 23:29-36; Lk 20:9-19).<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising to find, therefore, the scribes anxious to get rid of Jesus (Mk 14:1; Lk 11:53). His more flexible interpretation of the law posed a clear threat to their position and authority within the community. The scribes joined forces with their normal opponents (the high priesthood) to engineer Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43). When Jesus appeared before them and the rest of the Sanhedrin, they worked with the other leaders to construct a case against him worthy of death (Mt 26:57-66). When taking Jesus before Herod, they stood by and shouted their accusations with the others (Lk 23:10). Finally, they participated with other members of the Sanhedrin in mocking Jesus on the cross, demanding that Jesus save himself by coming down from the cross (Mt 27:41-43). Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the scribes continued with the other elements of the Sanhedrin to oppose the early Christian church, and they brought about Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 6:12-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Pharisees; Writer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SCRIBE Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus. Scribes in Preexilic Times The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion...","summary_en":"SCRIBE Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus. Scribes in Preexilic Times The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38261,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Wealth","title_en":"Wealth","content_ro":"<h3>WEALTH<\/h3>\n<p>Abundance, usually of money or material goods, whose value is ordinarily expressed in terms of some understood unit, such as a national currency. It is virtually synonymous with riches, and both may refer to family, friends, or even moral qualities.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT riches are a mark of favor with God (Ps 112:3), and he gives power to acquire wealth (Dt 8:18). Both the piety and the wealth of Job are well known (Jb 1:1-3). Solomon was perhaps the richest man who ever lived; God granted him “riches, possessions, and honor” because Solomon had asked for wisdom and discernment rather than material things (1 Kgs 3:10-13; 2 Chr 1:11-12). But the Bible makes it clear that a person’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions (Lk 12:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT wealthy men are often seen as godless—for example, the rich farmer (Lk 12:16-21) and the rich man who neglected the beggar Lazarus (16:19-31). The wealthy are condemned for oppression and greed (Jas 5:1-6). Luke 6:24 pronounces woe against the rich, and all three synoptic Gospels speak of the dangers of riches (Mt 13:22; Mk 4:19; Lk 8:14). But not all rich men were bad. Jesus was buried in the tomb of a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph (Mt 27:57). Nicodemus, who provided lavishly for the burial of Jesus (Jn 19:39), was “a ruler of the Jews” (3:1) and probably a man of wealth.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Mammon; Money; Poor, The; Riches; Wages.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WEALTH<\/h3>\n<p>Abundance, usually of money or material goods, whose value is ordinarily expressed in terms of some understood unit, such as a national currency. It is virtually synonymous with riches, and both may refer to family, friends, or even moral qualities.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT riches are a mark of favor with God (Ps 112:3), and he gives power to acquire wealth (Dt 8:18). Both the piety and the wealth of Job are well known (Jb 1:1-3). Solomon was perhaps the richest man who ever lived; God granted him “riches, possessions, and honor” because Solomon had asked for wisdom and discernment rather than material things (1 Kgs 3:10-13; 2 Chr 1:11-12). But the Bible makes it clear that a person’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions (Lk 12:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT wealthy men are often seen as godless—for example, the rich farmer (Lk 12:16-21) and the rich man who neglected the beggar Lazarus (16:19-31). The wealthy are condemned for oppression and greed (Jas 5:1-6). Luke 6:24 pronounces woe against the rich, and all three synoptic Gospels speak of the dangers of riches (Mt 13:22; Mk 4:19; Lk 8:14). But not all rich men were bad. Jesus was buried in the tomb of a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph (Mt 27:57). Nicodemus, who provided lavishly for the burial of Jesus (Jn 19:39), was “a ruler of the Jews” (3:1) and probably a man of wealth.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Mammon; Money; Poor, The; Riches; Wages.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WEALTH Abundance, usually of money or material goods, whose value is ordinarily expressed in terms of some understood unit, such as a national currency. It is virtually synonymous with riches, and both may refer to family, friends, or even moral qualities. In the OT riches are a mark of favor with God (Ps 112:3), and he gives power to acquire wealth (Dt 8:18). Both the piety and the wealth of Job are well known (Jb 1:1-3). Solomon was perhaps the richest man who ever lived; God granted him “r...","summary_en":"WEALTH Abundance, usually of money or material goods, whose value is ordinarily expressed in terms of some understood unit, such as a national currency. It is virtually synonymous with riches, and both may refer to family, friends, or even moral qualities. In the OT riches are a mark of favor with God (Ps 112:3), and he gives power to acquire wealth (Dt 8:18). Both the piety and the wealth of Job are well known (Jb 1:1-3). Solomon was perhaps the richest man who ever lived; God granted him “r...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56352,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:1<\/strong> John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific <em>man<\/em> using the same Greek word (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anthrōpos<\/span>) in both verses. • <em>Nicodemus<\/em> was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • <em>a Pharisee:<\/em> See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:1<\/strong> John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific <em>man<\/em> using the same Greek word (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anthrōpos<\/span>) in both verses. • <em>Nicodemus<\/em> was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • <em>a Pharisee:<\/em> See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:1 John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific man using the same Greek word (anthrōpos) in both verses. • Nicodemus was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • a Pharisee: See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.","summary_en":"3:1 John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific man using the same Greek word (anthrōpos) in both verses. • Nicodemus was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • a Pharisee: See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83978,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:1<\/strong> John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific <em>man<\/em> using the same Greek word (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anthrōpos<\/span>) in both verses. • <em>Nicodemus<\/em> was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • <em>a Pharisee:<\/em> See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:1<\/strong> John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific <em>man<\/em> using the same Greek word (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anthrōpos<\/span>) in both verses. • <em>Nicodemus<\/em> was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • <em>a Pharisee:<\/em> See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:1 John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific man using the same Greek word (anthrōpos) in both verses. • Nicodemus was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • a Pharisee: See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.","summary_en":"3:1 John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific man using the same Greek word (anthrōpos) in both verses. • Nicodemus was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • a Pharisee: See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111604,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:1<\/strong> John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific <em>man<\/em> using the same Greek word (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anthrōpos<\/span>) in both verses. • <em>Nicodemus<\/em> was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • <em>a Pharisee:<\/em> See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:1<\/strong> John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific <em>man<\/em> using the same Greek word (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anthrōpos<\/span>) in both verses. • <em>Nicodemus<\/em> was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • <em>a Pharisee:<\/em> See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:1 John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific man using the same Greek word (anthrōpos) in both verses. • Nicodemus was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • a Pharisee: See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.","summary_en":"3:1 John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific man using the same Greek word (anthrōpos) in both verses. • Nicodemus was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • a Pharisee: See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139230,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:1<\/strong> John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific <em>man<\/em> using the same Greek word (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anthrōpos<\/span>) in both verses. • <em>Nicodemus<\/em> was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • <em>a Pharisee:<\/em> See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:1<\/strong> John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific <em>man<\/em> using the same Greek word (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anthrōpos<\/span>) in both verses. • <em>Nicodemus<\/em> was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • <em>a Pharisee:<\/em> See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:1 John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific man using the same Greek word (anthrōpos) in both verses. • Nicodemus was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • a Pharisee: See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.","summary_en":"3:1 John links 2:25 and 3:1 by referring to humanity as a whole (“human nature,” 2:25) and then to one specific man using the same Greek word (anthrōpos) in both verses. • Nicodemus was saturated in religious knowledge and had witnessed Jesus’ work (2:13-24), but he had not experienced spiritual rebirth. • a Pharisee: See study note on 1:24. He was elite, proud of his spiritual purity, and well educated in Jewish law.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64939,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Citizenship in the Kingdom","title_en":"Citizenship in the Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>Citizenship in the Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus framed the Kingdom of Heaven primarily in terms of (1) an upward relationship with God, (2) an inward change of heart, and (3) outward relationships with other people. This new message of the Kingdom was compelling to Jesus’ hearers (7:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>The tendency is to make hard distinctions between these three areas, but all three are always present. For example, Jesus’ instruction to humility (5:5) at first seems simply inward, but it is also about attitude toward God and others. The command not to resist an evil person (5:39) seems outward-focused, but often requires active faith in God and internal fortitude. Jesus’ instruction on prayer (6:5-15) is primarily about our relationship with God, but prayer requires an internal recognition of need and is often about relationships with others.<\/p>\n<p>Citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven has a central requirement: Those who wish to follow Jesus and enter the Kingdom of Heaven must stop living self-centered lives and instead live God-centered ones. Those who try to achieve righteousness on their own still have self at the center and are still living in darkness. The call of Jesus is to live a life of true righteousness – the righteousness of God himself (5:20, 48). This is not a righteousness that can be attained. Instead, Jesus gives it to those who follow him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 7:24-29; 13:1-52; Mark 10:14-16; Luke 8:1-3; 9:1-6; John 3:1-21; Acts 8:12; 28:23-31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Citizenship in the Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus framed the Kingdom of Heaven primarily in terms of (1) an upward relationship with God, (2) an inward change of heart, and (3) outward relationships with other people. This new message of the Kingdom was compelling to Jesus’ hearers (7:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>The tendency is to make hard distinctions between these three areas, but all three are always present. For example, Jesus’ instruction to humility (5:5) at first seems simply inward, but it is also about attitude toward God and others. The command not to resist an evil person (5:39) seems outward-focused, but often requires active faith in God and internal fortitude. Jesus’ instruction on prayer (6:5-15) is primarily about our relationship with God, but prayer requires an internal recognition of need and is often about relationships with others.<\/p>\n<p>Citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven has a central requirement: Those who wish to follow Jesus and enter the Kingdom of Heaven must stop living self-centered lives and instead live God-centered ones. Those who try to achieve righteousness on their own still have self at the center and are still living in darkness. The call of Jesus is to live a life of true righteousness – the righteousness of God himself (5:20, 48). This is not a righteousness that can be attained. Instead, Jesus gives it to those who follow him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 7:24-29; 13:1-52; Mark 10:14-16; Luke 8:1-3; 9:1-6; John 3:1-21; Acts 8:12; 28:23-31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Citizenship in the Kingdom First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48). Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus framed the...","summary_en":"Citizenship in the Kingdom First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48). Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus framed the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65540,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92565,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Citizenship in the Kingdom","title_en":"Citizenship in the Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>Citizenship in the Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus framed the Kingdom of Heaven primarily in terms of (1) an upward relationship with God, (2) an inward change of heart, and (3) outward relationships with other people. This new message of the Kingdom was compelling to Jesus’ hearers (7:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>The tendency is to make hard distinctions between these three areas, but all three are always present. For example, Jesus’ instruction to humility (5:5) at first seems simply inward, but it is also about attitude toward God and others. The command not to resist an evil person (5:39) seems outward-focused, but often requires active faith in God and internal fortitude. Jesus’ instruction on prayer (6:5-15) is primarily about our relationship with God, but prayer requires an internal recognition of need and is often about relationships with others.<\/p>\n<p>Citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven has a central requirement: Those who wish to follow Jesus and enter the Kingdom of Heaven must stop living self-centered lives and instead live God-centered ones. Those who try to achieve righteousness on their own still have self at the center and are still living in darkness. The call of Jesus is to live a life of true righteousness – the righteousness of God himself (5:20, 48). This is not a righteousness that can be attained. Instead, Jesus gives it to those who follow him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 7:24-29; 13:1-52; Mark 10:14-16; Luke 8:1-3; 9:1-6; John 3:1-21; Acts 8:12; 28:23-31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Citizenship in the Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus framed the Kingdom of Heaven primarily in terms of (1) an upward relationship with God, (2) an inward change of heart, and (3) outward relationships with other people. This new message of the Kingdom was compelling to Jesus’ hearers (7:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>The tendency is to make hard distinctions between these three areas, but all three are always present. For example, Jesus’ instruction to humility (5:5) at first seems simply inward, but it is also about attitude toward God and others. The command not to resist an evil person (5:39) seems outward-focused, but often requires active faith in God and internal fortitude. Jesus’ instruction on prayer (6:5-15) is primarily about our relationship with God, but prayer requires an internal recognition of need and is often about relationships with others.<\/p>\n<p>Citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven has a central requirement: Those who wish to follow Jesus and enter the Kingdom of Heaven must stop living self-centered lives and instead live God-centered ones. Those who try to achieve righteousness on their own still have self at the center and are still living in darkness. The call of Jesus is to live a life of true righteousness – the righteousness of God himself (5:20, 48). This is not a righteousness that can be attained. Instead, Jesus gives it to those who follow him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 7:24-29; 13:1-52; Mark 10:14-16; Luke 8:1-3; 9:1-6; John 3:1-21; Acts 8:12; 28:23-31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Citizenship in the Kingdom First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48). Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus framed the...","summary_en":"Citizenship in the Kingdom First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48). Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus framed the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93166,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120191,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Citizenship in the Kingdom","title_en":"Citizenship in the Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>Citizenship in the Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus framed the Kingdom of Heaven primarily in terms of (1) an upward relationship with God, (2) an inward change of heart, and (3) outward relationships with other people. This new message of the Kingdom was compelling to Jesus’ hearers (7:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>The tendency is to make hard distinctions between these three areas, but all three are always present. For example, Jesus’ instruction to humility (5:5) at first seems simply inward, but it is also about attitude toward God and others. The command not to resist an evil person (5:39) seems outward-focused, but often requires active faith in God and internal fortitude. Jesus’ instruction on prayer (6:5-15) is primarily about our relationship with God, but prayer requires an internal recognition of need and is often about relationships with others.<\/p>\n<p>Citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven has a central requirement: Those who wish to follow Jesus and enter the Kingdom of Heaven must stop living self-centered lives and instead live God-centered ones. Those who try to achieve righteousness on their own still have self at the center and are still living in darkness. The call of Jesus is to live a life of true righteousness – the righteousness of God himself (5:20, 48). This is not a righteousness that can be attained. Instead, Jesus gives it to those who follow him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 7:24-29; 13:1-52; Mark 10:14-16; Luke 8:1-3; 9:1-6; John 3:1-21; Acts 8:12; 28:23-31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Citizenship in the Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus framed the Kingdom of Heaven primarily in terms of (1) an upward relationship with God, (2) an inward change of heart, and (3) outward relationships with other people. This new message of the Kingdom was compelling to Jesus’ hearers (7:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>The tendency is to make hard distinctions between these three areas, but all three are always present. For example, Jesus’ instruction to humility (5:5) at first seems simply inward, but it is also about attitude toward God and others. The command not to resist an evil person (5:39) seems outward-focused, but often requires active faith in God and internal fortitude. Jesus’ instruction on prayer (6:5-15) is primarily about our relationship with God, but prayer requires an internal recognition of need and is often about relationships with others.<\/p>\n<p>Citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven has a central requirement: Those who wish to follow Jesus and enter the Kingdom of Heaven must stop living self-centered lives and instead live God-centered ones. Those who try to achieve righteousness on their own still have self at the center and are still living in darkness. The call of Jesus is to live a life of true righteousness – the righteousness of God himself (5:20, 48). This is not a righteousness that can be attained. Instead, Jesus gives it to those who follow him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 7:24-29; 13:1-52; Mark 10:14-16; Luke 8:1-3; 9:1-6; John 3:1-21; Acts 8:12; 28:23-31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Citizenship in the Kingdom First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48). Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus framed the...","summary_en":"Citizenship in the Kingdom First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48). Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus framed the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120792,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147817,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Citizenship in the Kingdom","title_en":"Citizenship in the Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>Citizenship in the Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus framed the Kingdom of Heaven primarily in terms of (1) an upward relationship with God, (2) an inward change of heart, and (3) outward relationships with other people. This new message of the Kingdom was compelling to Jesus’ hearers (7:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>The tendency is to make hard distinctions between these three areas, but all three are always present. For example, Jesus’ instruction to humility (5:5) at first seems simply inward, but it is also about attitude toward God and others. The command not to resist an evil person (5:39) seems outward-focused, but often requires active faith in God and internal fortitude. Jesus’ instruction on prayer (6:5-15) is primarily about our relationship with God, but prayer requires an internal recognition of need and is often about relationships with others.<\/p>\n<p>Citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven has a central requirement: Those who wish to follow Jesus and enter the Kingdom of Heaven must stop living self-centered lives and instead live God-centered ones. Those who try to achieve righteousness on their own still have self at the center and are still living in darkness. The call of Jesus is to live a life of true righteousness – the righteousness of God himself (5:20, 48). This is not a righteousness that can be attained. Instead, Jesus gives it to those who follow him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 7:24-29; 13:1-52; Mark 10:14-16; Luke 8:1-3; 9:1-6; John 3:1-21; Acts 8:12; 28:23-31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Citizenship in the Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus framed the Kingdom of Heaven primarily in terms of (1) an upward relationship with God, (2) an inward change of heart, and (3) outward relationships with other people. This new message of the Kingdom was compelling to Jesus’ hearers (7:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>The tendency is to make hard distinctions between these three areas, but all three are always present. For example, Jesus’ instruction to humility (5:5) at first seems simply inward, but it is also about attitude toward God and others. The command not to resist an evil person (5:39) seems outward-focused, but often requires active faith in God and internal fortitude. Jesus’ instruction on prayer (6:5-15) is primarily about our relationship with God, but prayer requires an internal recognition of need and is often about relationships with others.<\/p>\n<p>Citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven has a central requirement: Those who wish to follow Jesus and enter the Kingdom of Heaven must stop living self-centered lives and instead live God-centered ones. Those who try to achieve righteousness on their own still have self at the center and are still living in darkness. The call of Jesus is to live a life of true righteousness – the righteousness of God himself (5:20, 48). This is not a righteousness that can be attained. Instead, Jesus gives it to those who follow him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 7:24-29; 13:1-52; Mark 10:14-16; Luke 8:1-3; 9:1-6; John 3:1-21; Acts 8:12; 28:23-31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Citizenship in the Kingdom First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48). Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus framed the...","summary_en":"Citizenship in the Kingdom First-century Jews were looking for a king like David or Judas Maccabeus who would overthrow their oppressors. Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God was radically different from these expectations (5:43-48). Matthew presents Jesus as a teacher unlike any other, and the Sermon on the Mount is his longest and most famous sermon. More than simply a collection of Jesus’ ethical or moral teachings, it is a manifesto of citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus framed the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148418,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":27552,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Night","title_en":"Night","content_ro":"<h3>NIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Word in Scripture denoting that time of darkness from dusk until dawn when no light of the sun is visible. For example, Joseph took Mary and Jesus to Egypt by night (Mt 2:14). The shepherds were keeping watch over their flocks at night (Lk 2:8). Nicodemus came to see Jesus at night (Jn 3:2). An angel from the Lord came and opened the prison doors at night in order to let the disciples out (Acts 5:19).<\/p>\n<p>According to Genesis 1, the day-night cycle was instituted by God and “night” was the name given to the period of darkness (Gn 1:5). Later, God put the lights in the expanse of the heavens, appointing the sun to rule or dominate the day, and the moon, the lesser light, to dominate the night (vv 16-18). The covenant of the Lord is the basis of the regularity of the rotation of day and night.<\/p>\n<p>The night in OT times was apparently divided into three periods or “watches.” The latter name originated with the changing of the guard at these times. Gideon’s 300 men blew their trumpets and broke their pitchers at the beginning of the middle watch (Jgs 7:19). Although no references in the OT give the limits of these three periods, night was considered to begin at sunset, and consequently the periods may have been 6:00 to 10:00 <span>pm<\/span>, 10:00 <span>pm<\/span> to 2:00 <span>am<\/span>, and 2:00 to 6:00 <span>am<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Later, according to the Roman calculation of time, night was divided into four watches. Some historians think they began at 9:30 <span>pm<\/span>, at midnight, at 2:30 <span>am<\/span>, and at 5:00 <span>am<\/span>. Others think that the nighttime period between 6:00 <span>pm<\/span> and 6:00 <span>am<\/span> was divided equally into four periods, the first beginning at 6:00 <span>pm<\/span>, the second at 9:00 <span>pm<\/span>, the third at midnight, and the fourth at 3:00 <span>am<\/span>. Mark 13:35 contains the popular designations for these four watches, namely late in the day (early evening), midnight, the cock-crowing, and early in the morning.<\/p>\n<p>Apparently, Matthew 14:25 and Mark 6:48 follow the Roman calculation when they locate Jesus’ walking on the water at about the fourth watch of the night.<\/p>\n<p>A specialized use of the word “night” along with the word “day” emphasizes the continuance of activity. For example, the man with an unclean spirit is said to have been in the mountains and in the tombs “night and day” (Mk 5:5). Paul refers to his having labored, working night and day, so as not to be a burden to the church (1 Thes 2:9). Later in the same book he refers to his continuous praying night and day (3:10).<\/p>\n<p>Along with this literal usage of the word “night,” there is also a figurative or metaphorical usage. In some references it refers to divine judgment (Am 5:8-9; Mi 3:6). Jesus uses “night” to refer to death (Jn 9:4). Once the night (death) comes, time for working is over.<\/p>\n<p>Paul compares this present age (soon to be over with) to the night that is almost gone (Rom 13:12). Again, Paul speaks of himself and his readers as children of the light and of the day, not the night and darkness (1 Thes 5:5). In this context he links night with separation from God, sin, intemperance, careless living, as well as spiritual blindness and ignorance, especially regarding the Lord’s return.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Day.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Word in Scripture denoting that time of darkness from dusk until dawn when no light of the sun is visible. For example, Joseph took Mary and Jesus to Egypt by night (Mt 2:14). The shepherds were keeping watch over their flocks at night (Lk 2:8). Nicodemus came to see Jesus at night (Jn 3:2). An angel from the Lord came and opened the prison doors at night in order to let the disciples out (Acts 5:19).<\/p>\n<p>According to Genesis 1, the day-night cycle was instituted by God and “night” was the name given to the period of darkness (Gn 1:5). Later, God put the lights in the expanse of the heavens, appointing the sun to rule or dominate the day, and the moon, the lesser light, to dominate the night (vv 16-18). The covenant of the Lord is the basis of the regularity of the rotation of day and night.<\/p>\n<p>The night in OT times was apparently divided into three periods or “watches.” The latter name originated with the changing of the guard at these times. Gideon’s 300 men blew their trumpets and broke their pitchers at the beginning of the middle watch (Jgs 7:19). Although no references in the OT give the limits of these three periods, night was considered to begin at sunset, and consequently the periods may have been 6:00 to 10:00 <span>pm<\/span>, 10:00 <span>pm<\/span> to 2:00 <span>am<\/span>, and 2:00 to 6:00 <span>am<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Later, according to the Roman calculation of time, night was divided into four watches. Some historians think they began at 9:30 <span>pm<\/span>, at midnight, at 2:30 <span>am<\/span>, and at 5:00 <span>am<\/span>. Others think that the nighttime period between 6:00 <span>pm<\/span> and 6:00 <span>am<\/span> was divided equally into four periods, the first beginning at 6:00 <span>pm<\/span>, the second at 9:00 <span>pm<\/span>, the third at midnight, and the fourth at 3:00 <span>am<\/span>. Mark 13:35 contains the popular designations for these four watches, namely late in the day (early evening), midnight, the cock-crowing, and early in the morning.<\/p>\n<p>Apparently, Matthew 14:25 and Mark 6:48 follow the Roman calculation when they locate Jesus’ walking on the water at about the fourth watch of the night.<\/p>\n<p>A specialized use of the word “night” along with the word “day” emphasizes the continuance of activity. For example, the man with an unclean spirit is said to have been in the mountains and in the tombs “night and day” (Mk 5:5). Paul refers to his having labored, working night and day, so as not to be a burden to the church (1 Thes 2:9). Later in the same book he refers to his continuous praying night and day (3:10).<\/p>\n<p>Along with this literal usage of the word “night,” there is also a figurative or metaphorical usage. In some references it refers to divine judgment (Am 5:8-9; Mi 3:6). Jesus uses “night” to refer to death (Jn 9:4). Once the night (death) comes, time for working is over.<\/p>\n<p>Paul compares this present age (soon to be over with) to the night that is almost gone (Rom 13:12). Again, Paul speaks of himself and his readers as children of the light and of the day, not the night and darkness (1 Thes 5:5). In this context he links night with separation from God, sin, intemperance, careless living, as well as spiritual blindness and ignorance, especially regarding the Lord’s return.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Day.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NIGHT Word in Scripture denoting that time of darkness from dusk until dawn when no light of the sun is visible. For example, Joseph took Mary and Jesus to Egypt by night (Mt 2:14). The shepherds were keeping watch over their flocks at night (Lk 2:8). Nicodemus came to see Jesus at night (Jn 3:2). An angel from the Lord came and opened the prison doors at night in order to let the disciples out (Acts 5:19). According to Genesis 1, the day-night cycle was instituted by God and “night” was the ...","summary_en":"NIGHT Word in Scripture denoting that time of darkness from dusk until dawn when no light of the sun is visible. For example, Joseph took Mary and Jesus to Egypt by night (Mt 2:14). The shepherds were keeping watch over their flocks at night (Lk 2:8). Nicodemus came to see Jesus at night (Jn 3:2). An angel from the Lord came and opened the prison doors at night in order to let the disciples out (Acts 5:19). According to Genesis 1, the day-night cycle was instituted by God and “night” was the ...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32271,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rabbi","title_en":"Rabbi","content_ro":"<h3>RABBI<\/h3>\n<p>Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd generally (6:25). Mary Magdalene (Mk 10:51) and blind Bartimaeus (Jn 20:16) both use the longer form, “rabboni,” to address Jesus directly, thus indicating even more profound respect than the use of the shorter title “rabbi.” By the time of the writing of John’s Gospel, the title “rabbi” meant “teacher”; John explicitly states this in 1:38 and implicitly says this in 3:2.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus condemns the scribes and the Pharisees for their evident pride displayed in their love of being greeted in the marketplaces and their insistence on having people call them “rabbi” (Mt 23:7-8). Jesus prohibited the use of the title for his own disciples, saying, “You are not to be called rabbi.” However, Jesus’ prohibition was more against seeking to be called this and insisting on it than the legitimate possession of the title itself. In fact, when people did use the title of Jesus in a reverent way, they were not in any way rebuked.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RABBI<\/h3>\n<p>Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd generally (6:25). Mary Magdalene (Mk 10:51) and blind Bartimaeus (Jn 20:16) both use the longer form, “rabboni,” to address Jesus directly, thus indicating even more profound respect than the use of the shorter title “rabbi.” By the time of the writing of John’s Gospel, the title “rabbi” meant “teacher”; John explicitly states this in 1:38 and implicitly says this in 3:2.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus condemns the scribes and the Pharisees for their evident pride displayed in their love of being greeted in the marketplaces and their insistence on having people call them “rabbi” (Mt 23:7-8). Jesus prohibited the use of the title for his own disciples, saying, “You are not to be called rabbi.” However, Jesus’ prohibition was more against seeking to be called this and insisting on it than the legitimate possession of the title itself. In fact, when people did use the title of Jesus in a reverent way, they were not in any way rebuked.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RABBI Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers. According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd gene...","summary_en":"RABBI Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers. According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd gene...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56353,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:2","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:2<\/strong> <em>After dark:<\/em> Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:2<\/strong> <em>After dark:<\/em> Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:2 After dark: Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).","summary_en":"3:2 After dark: Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83979,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:2","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:2<\/strong> <em>After dark:<\/em> Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:2<\/strong> <em>After dark:<\/em> Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:2 After dark: Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).","summary_en":"3:2 After dark: Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111605,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:2","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:2<\/strong> <em>After dark:<\/em> Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:2<\/strong> <em>After dark:<\/em> Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:2 After dark: Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).","summary_en":"3:2 After dark: Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139231,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:2","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:2<\/strong> <em>After dark:<\/em> Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:2<\/strong> <em>After dark:<\/em> Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:2 After dark: Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).","summary_en":"3:2 After dark: Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65837,"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":66406,"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":93463,"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":94032,"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":121089,"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":121658,"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":148715,"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":149284,"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}],"3":[{"id":5118,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Birth*, New","title_en":"Birth*, New","content_ro":"<h3>BIRTH*, N<span>ew<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Means of receiving “spiritual life” and entering the kingdom of God (Jn 3:3-7). <em>See<\/em> Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIRTH*, N<span>ew<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Means of receiving “spiritual life” and entering the kingdom of God (Jn 3:3-7). <em>See<\/em> Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIRTH*, New Means of receiving “spiritual life” and entering the kingdom of God (Jn 3:3-7). See Regeneration.","summary_en":"BIRTH*, New Means of receiving “spiritual life” and entering the kingdom of God (Jn 3:3-7). See Regeneration.","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5553,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Born Again","title_en":"Born Again","content_ro":"<h3>BORN AGAIN<\/h3>\n<p>Expression used by Jesus in explaining to Nicodemus how one enters the kingdom of God (Jn 3:3-7). <em>See<\/em> Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BORN AGAIN<\/h3>\n<p>Expression used by Jesus in explaining to Nicodemus how one enters the kingdom of God (Jn 3:3-7). <em>See<\/em> Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BORN AGAIN Expression used by Jesus in explaining to Nicodemus how one enters the kingdom of God (Jn 3:3-7). See Regeneration.","summary_en":"BORN AGAIN Expression used by Jesus in explaining to Nicodemus how one enters the kingdom of God (Jn 3:3-7). See Regeneration.","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19659,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21913,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23226,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Life","title_en":"Life","content_ro":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","summary_en":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27393,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"New","title_en":"New","content_ro":"<h3>NEW<\/h3>\n<p>That which has just been made or come into existence—often replacing that which already existed, thereby turning the old into new.<\/p>\n<p>That the second part of the Bible is called the <em>New<\/em> Testament indicates how fundamental the idea of “new” is to biblical revelation. Many key theological expressions incorporate the idea: new creation (2 Cor 5:17), new birth (Jn 3:3), new man (Eph 2:15; Col 3:10), new commandment (Jn 13:34), new covenant (Jer 31:31), new life (Rom 6:4), and various others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheExpectationoftheNew\">The Expectation of the New<\/p>\n<p>The totality of the expectation of the <em>new<\/em> is best expressed in Jeremiah and Ezekiel and in the reference in the Psalter to the “new song” to be given to the people to sing (e.g., Pss 33:3; 40:3; 149:1; cf., also Is 42:10). Jeremiah speaks of the day when God will make a new covenant with the house of Israel (Jer 31:31-34; cf. Ez 34:25-31; 37:26-28). In contrast with the old, this new covenant will be written upon the heart—that is, it will be internalized. Similarly Ezekiel (Ez 36:22-32) tells of the day when God, as an expression of his own holiness, will cleanse his people and will give a heart of flesh in place of the heart of stone. This will usher in the age of the Spirit and will bring about a new existence, characterized by security and freedom, in which the laws of God are carried out. The supreme feature of this new time is the new spirit within them (Ez 11:19). Joel speaks also of that day when the Spirit of God will be poured out on all flesh (Jl 2:28). Isaiah 65:17 states the promise of “new heavens and a new earth,” words that often reflect national circumstances and hopes (for example, after the exile). However, they came to take on new eschatological significance beyond the hope of the nation Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheComingoftheNew\">The Coming of the New<\/p>\n<p>The central proclamation of the presence of the kingdom in the world through Jesus is a declaration that the promised new age has broken into time in powerful ways. Jesus’ ministry is one of fulfillment; what has been promised by prophets has begun to take place. John the Baptist had prepared the way for the one who would bestow the promised Spirit. The giving of this Spirit is the giving of new life. Through faith in Christ, one is born anew (Jn 3:3-7). But Jesus had to die in order for this new life to be given. At the Last Supper the cup of wine Jesus shared with his disciples symbolized the blood of the new covenant (Mk 14:24).<\/p>\n<p>The early church expressed this significance in varying metaphors. This “newness of life” is expressed sacramentally through baptism (Rom 6:4). The eucharistic cup is the new covenant through blood (1 Cor 11:25). An extended discourse on the old and new covenants shows that by the shedding of his blood Christ has become mediator of a new covenant (Heb 9:15); by his blood he has opened up a new and living way into the Holy Place (10:19-20). Paul restates the promise of Ezekiel for a heart of flesh (2 Cor 3:3), after which he gives an account of the ministry of the new covenant in contrast to the old. The church represents the appearance of the new age in the domain of the old.<\/p>\n<p>The one who comes to Christ by faith is declared a new person, a new creation, for whom the old has passed away (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). Jewish-Gentile hostility disappears in the resulting “new humanity” (Eph 2:15). All other social distinctions (such as male-female, slave-free) pass away in the new humanity created afresh in Christ Jesus (Col 3:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The newness of a person in Christ is the foundation for NT ethics (Eph 4:24; Col 3:12). The new commandment (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:8) is not really new (1 Jn 2:7), but now has new possibility and dimension by virtue of the power and pattern of Jesus. Though this new life is a gift of God, the <em>process<\/em> of being made new continues. Transformation by the renewing of the mind (Rom 12:2) brings realization of the will of God. Paul declares the inner man being renewed day by day (2 Cor 4:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRealizationoftheNew\">The Realization of the New<\/p>\n<p>As real as the new life of the believer may be, Scripture recognizes a tension between the new age that has come in history but is not yet fully realized. There is a projection to that time when all things are made new (Rv 21:5). With the end of the old, there is a new heaven and new earth. The new Jerusalem (v 2) “descends” as the dwelling place of God. The people of God receive a new name (3:12) as the former things pass away. To the redeemed of the Lord, a new song is given, the song of the Lamb slain from the very foundation of creation: “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” The antiphonal song returns, “To him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might for ever and ever!” (5:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandment, The New; Covenant, The New; Jerusalem, New; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature; New Heavens and New Earth; Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEW<\/h3>\n<p>That which has just been made or come into existence—often replacing that which already existed, thereby turning the old into new.<\/p>\n<p>That the second part of the Bible is called the <em>New<\/em> Testament indicates how fundamental the idea of “new” is to biblical revelation. Many key theological expressions incorporate the idea: new creation (2 Cor 5:17), new birth (Jn 3:3), new man (Eph 2:15; Col 3:10), new commandment (Jn 13:34), new covenant (Jer 31:31), new life (Rom 6:4), and various others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheExpectationoftheNew\">The Expectation of the New<\/p>\n<p>The totality of the expectation of the <em>new<\/em> is best expressed in Jeremiah and Ezekiel and in the reference in the Psalter to the “new song” to be given to the people to sing (e.g., Pss 33:3; 40:3; 149:1; cf., also Is 42:10). Jeremiah speaks of the day when God will make a new covenant with the house of Israel (Jer 31:31-34; cf. Ez 34:25-31; 37:26-28). In contrast with the old, this new covenant will be written upon the heart—that is, it will be internalized. Similarly Ezekiel (Ez 36:22-32) tells of the day when God, as an expression of his own holiness, will cleanse his people and will give a heart of flesh in place of the heart of stone. This will usher in the age of the Spirit and will bring about a new existence, characterized by security and freedom, in which the laws of God are carried out. The supreme feature of this new time is the new spirit within them (Ez 11:19). Joel speaks also of that day when the Spirit of God will be poured out on all flesh (Jl 2:28). Isaiah 65:17 states the promise of “new heavens and a new earth,” words that often reflect national circumstances and hopes (for example, after the exile). However, they came to take on new eschatological significance beyond the hope of the nation Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheComingoftheNew\">The Coming of the New<\/p>\n<p>The central proclamation of the presence of the kingdom in the world through Jesus is a declaration that the promised new age has broken into time in powerful ways. Jesus’ ministry is one of fulfillment; what has been promised by prophets has begun to take place. John the Baptist had prepared the way for the one who would bestow the promised Spirit. The giving of this Spirit is the giving of new life. Through faith in Christ, one is born anew (Jn 3:3-7). But Jesus had to die in order for this new life to be given. At the Last Supper the cup of wine Jesus shared with his disciples symbolized the blood of the new covenant (Mk 14:24).<\/p>\n<p>The early church expressed this significance in varying metaphors. This “newness of life” is expressed sacramentally through baptism (Rom 6:4). The eucharistic cup is the new covenant through blood (1 Cor 11:25). An extended discourse on the old and new covenants shows that by the shedding of his blood Christ has become mediator of a new covenant (Heb 9:15); by his blood he has opened up a new and living way into the Holy Place (10:19-20). Paul restates the promise of Ezekiel for a heart of flesh (2 Cor 3:3), after which he gives an account of the ministry of the new covenant in contrast to the old. The church represents the appearance of the new age in the domain of the old.<\/p>\n<p>The one who comes to Christ by faith is declared a new person, a new creation, for whom the old has passed away (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). Jewish-Gentile hostility disappears in the resulting “new humanity” (Eph 2:15). All other social distinctions (such as male-female, slave-free) pass away in the new humanity created afresh in Christ Jesus (Col 3:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The newness of a person in Christ is the foundation for NT ethics (Eph 4:24; Col 3:12). The new commandment (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:8) is not really new (1 Jn 2:7), but now has new possibility and dimension by virtue of the power and pattern of Jesus. Though this new life is a gift of God, the <em>process<\/em> of being made new continues. Transformation by the renewing of the mind (Rom 12:2) brings realization of the will of God. Paul declares the inner man being renewed day by day (2 Cor 4:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRealizationoftheNew\">The Realization of the New<\/p>\n<p>As real as the new life of the believer may be, Scripture recognizes a tension between the new age that has come in history but is not yet fully realized. There is a projection to that time when all things are made new (Rv 21:5). With the end of the old, there is a new heaven and new earth. The new Jerusalem (v 2) “descends” as the dwelling place of God. The people of God receive a new name (3:12) as the former things pass away. To the redeemed of the Lord, a new song is given, the song of the Lamb slain from the very foundation of creation: “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” The antiphonal song returns, “To him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might for ever and ever!” (5:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandment, The New; Covenant, The New; Jerusalem, New; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature; New Heavens and New Earth; Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEW That which has just been made or come into existence—often replacing that which already existed, thereby turning the old into new. That the second part of the Bible is called the New Testament indicates how fundamental the idea of “new” is to biblical revelation. Many key theological expressions incorporate the idea: new creation (2 Cor 5:17), new birth (Jn 3:3), new man (Eph 2:15; Col 3:10), new commandment (Jn 13:34), new covenant (Jer 31:31), new life (Rom 6:4), and various others. The...","summary_en":"NEW That which has just been made or come into existence—often replacing that which already existed, thereby turning the old into new. That the second part of the Bible is called the New Testament indicates how fundamental the idea of “new” is to biblical revelation. Many key theological expressions incorporate the idea: new creation (2 Cor 5:17), new birth (Jn 3:3), new man (Eph 2:15; Col 3:10), new commandment (Jn 13:34), new covenant (Jer 31:31), new life (Rom 6:4), and various others. The...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33635,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Salvation","title_en":"Salvation","content_ro":"<h3>SALVATION<\/h3>\n<p>God’s way of providing people deliverance from sin and death. Scripture reveals God but it also reveals his plan to save the human race. In that sense, salvation is a major theme in both the OT and NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The concept of salvation is represented by various terms and situations in both Testaments. Among several Hebrew words that mean “deliver” or “save,” the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yasha‘<\/span> and derivatives are most frequently translated by English versions as “save” or “salvation.” Frequency in the English Bible depends upon the version considered. For example, in the OT “salvation” is found 74 times in the <span>nlt<\/span>, 80 times in the <span>niv<\/span>, 90 times in the <span>rsv<\/span>, 111 times in the <span>nasb<\/span>, and 119 times in the <span>kjv<\/span>. Salvation is not used as a technical term in the OT and is ascribed to both individuals and God. Leaders like Samson (Jgs 13:5) or David (2 Sm 8:6) are used of the Lord to bring deliverance to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s concept of salvation was rooted in the historical experience of the exodus. This momentous occasion was an opportunity to witness the salvation of the Lord (Ex 14:13) firsthand. Poets (Ps 106:8) and prophets (Is 43:3; Hos 13:4) later reiterated God’s salvation when recalling the exodus experience. Israel’s understanding of salvation was worked out in historical instances like Sennacherib’s attack on Jerusalem in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, when the Lord declared that he would save the city for his name’s sake (2 Kgs 19:34; cf. 18:30, 35). Israel’s opportunity to see God’s salvation through various leaders and situations corroborated this understanding of God as the God of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s response to God’s deliverance was primarily praise, as evidenced so often in the psalms (Pss 3:8; 9:14; 21:1) and earlier poetic passages (Ex 15:2; 1 Sm 2:1). In addition, they directed petitions and pleas for help to the Lord for his salvation—whether from enemies (Pss 35:3; 38:22), sickness (69:29), or battle (140:7; 144:10-11)—and in faith expected his deliverance (35:9; 65:5).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets emphasized the eschatological (end-time) aspect of salvation. God’s ability to save was revealed by his great works in the past, which thus promoted the anticipation of his work of deliverance in the future. This future hope was for the nation of Israel (Is 45:17) but anticipated universal deliverance (49:6). The prophets looked forward to deliverance and return from exile in Babylon (Is 49:25-26; Jer 46:27), yet they also spoke of an abiding future salvation (Is 45:17; 51:6-8). The messianic hope is indicated in passages that speak of an individual who will bring God’s salvation. Isaiah speaks of the Servant who brings salvation to the ends of the earth (49:6), while Jeremiah writes of deliverance by God’s righteous Branch (Jer 23:5-6). The mention of the king who brings salvation in Zechariah 9:9 reflects this messianic theme and is applied to Jesus Christ in Matthew 21:4-5.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In classical Greek the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> (“to save”) and noun <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">soteria<\/span> (“salvation”) are used for the concept of “rescue,” “deliverance” or “salvation,” and even “well-being” or “health.” The Septuagint most frequently uses <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> to render the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yasha‘<\/span> (“to save”), and the NT primarily employs <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> and its derivatives for the idea of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>These Greek terms are generally used theologically in the NT, but examples of nontheological usage occur. In Acts 27, these words refer to the threat and deliverance of the soldiers, sailors, and prisoners from shipwreck (vv 20, 31), as well as their well-being (v 34).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels “salvation” is clearly connected with the OT concept of salvation; it is applied to the coming of Christ in Zechariah’s prophecy (Lk 1:69, 71; cf. Pss 106:10; 132:17) and in Simeon’s hymn of praise (Lk 2:30). While <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">soteria<\/span> does not occur frequently in the Gospels, the concept of salvation is implied in Jesus’ statement about entrance into the kingdom of God (Mt 19:24-26) and his miracles of healing (Lk 17:19; 18:42).<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaches that salvation has its source in Jesus Christ (2 Tm 2:10; Heb 5:9), who is the “author” and mediator of salvation (Heb 2:10; 7:25). Salvation is God’s work (1 Thes 5:9) and is offered by his grace (Eph 2:8-9). The message of salvation is contained in the Scriptures (2 Tm 3:15) and is carried by those who proclaim the word of truth (Eph 1:13). The appropriate response is repentance (2 Cor 7:10) and faith (2 Tm 3:15; 1 Pt 1:9). This was the preaching of the early church as it proclaimed the Savior Jesus (Acts 4:12; 13:23-26; 16:30-31). Paul especially proclaimed the universality of God’s offer of salvation (Rom 1:16; Ti 2:11). His desire was for Jews to be saved (Rom 10:1), though he primarily preached the message of salvation to the Gentiles (11:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Within the Scriptures there are many other terms associated with the concept of salvation. The new birth speaks of being made alive in Christ (“born again,” Jn 3:3). Justification envisions one’s legal standing before God, while redemption speaks more of the means of salvation—the payment of a price to bring one back to God. Reconciliation speaks of a change in relationship and propitiation, which evokes the OT sacrificial system and points to the turning away of God’s wrath. These terms and others share some common ground with the biblical concept of salvation, but all point to the person and work of Jesus Christ the Savior.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Justification, Justified; Reconciliation; Redeemer, Redemption; Savior.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SALVATION<\/h3>\n<p>God’s way of providing people deliverance from sin and death. Scripture reveals God but it also reveals his plan to save the human race. In that sense, salvation is a major theme in both the OT and NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The concept of salvation is represented by various terms and situations in both Testaments. Among several Hebrew words that mean “deliver” or “save,” the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yasha‘<\/span> and derivatives are most frequently translated by English versions as “save” or “salvation.” Frequency in the English Bible depends upon the version considered. For example, in the OT “salvation” is found 74 times in the <span>nlt<\/span>, 80 times in the <span>niv<\/span>, 90 times in the <span>rsv<\/span>, 111 times in the <span>nasb<\/span>, and 119 times in the <span>kjv<\/span>. Salvation is not used as a technical term in the OT and is ascribed to both individuals and God. Leaders like Samson (Jgs 13:5) or David (2 Sm 8:6) are used of the Lord to bring deliverance to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s concept of salvation was rooted in the historical experience of the exodus. This momentous occasion was an opportunity to witness the salvation of the Lord (Ex 14:13) firsthand. Poets (Ps 106:8) and prophets (Is 43:3; Hos 13:4) later reiterated God’s salvation when recalling the exodus experience. Israel’s understanding of salvation was worked out in historical instances like Sennacherib’s attack on Jerusalem in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, when the Lord declared that he would save the city for his name’s sake (2 Kgs 19:34; cf. 18:30, 35). Israel’s opportunity to see God’s salvation through various leaders and situations corroborated this understanding of God as the God of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s response to God’s deliverance was primarily praise, as evidenced so often in the psalms (Pss 3:8; 9:14; 21:1) and earlier poetic passages (Ex 15:2; 1 Sm 2:1). In addition, they directed petitions and pleas for help to the Lord for his salvation—whether from enemies (Pss 35:3; 38:22), sickness (69:29), or battle (140:7; 144:10-11)—and in faith expected his deliverance (35:9; 65:5).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets emphasized the eschatological (end-time) aspect of salvation. God’s ability to save was revealed by his great works in the past, which thus promoted the anticipation of his work of deliverance in the future. This future hope was for the nation of Israel (Is 45:17) but anticipated universal deliverance (49:6). The prophets looked forward to deliverance and return from exile in Babylon (Is 49:25-26; Jer 46:27), yet they also spoke of an abiding future salvation (Is 45:17; 51:6-8). The messianic hope is indicated in passages that speak of an individual who will bring God’s salvation. Isaiah speaks of the Servant who brings salvation to the ends of the earth (49:6), while Jeremiah writes of deliverance by God’s righteous Branch (Jer 23:5-6). The mention of the king who brings salvation in Zechariah 9:9 reflects this messianic theme and is applied to Jesus Christ in Matthew 21:4-5.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In classical Greek the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> (“to save”) and noun <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">soteria<\/span> (“salvation”) are used for the concept of “rescue,” “deliverance” or “salvation,” and even “well-being” or “health.” The Septuagint most frequently uses <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> to render the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yasha‘<\/span> (“to save”), and the NT primarily employs <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sozo<\/span> and its derivatives for the idea of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>These Greek terms are generally used theologically in the NT, but examples of nontheological usage occur. In Acts 27, these words refer to the threat and deliverance of the soldiers, sailors, and prisoners from shipwreck (vv 20, 31), as well as their well-being (v 34).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels “salvation” is clearly connected with the OT concept of salvation; it is applied to the coming of Christ in Zechariah’s prophecy (Lk 1:69, 71; cf. Pss 106:10; 132:17) and in Simeon’s hymn of praise (Lk 2:30). While <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">soteria<\/span> does not occur frequently in the Gospels, the concept of salvation is implied in Jesus’ statement about entrance into the kingdom of God (Mt 19:24-26) and his miracles of healing (Lk 17:19; 18:42).<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaches that salvation has its source in Jesus Christ (2 Tm 2:10; Heb 5:9), who is the “author” and mediator of salvation (Heb 2:10; 7:25). Salvation is God’s work (1 Thes 5:9) and is offered by his grace (Eph 2:8-9). The message of salvation is contained in the Scriptures (2 Tm 3:15) and is carried by those who proclaim the word of truth (Eph 1:13). The appropriate response is repentance (2 Cor 7:10) and faith (2 Tm 3:15; 1 Pt 1:9). This was the preaching of the early church as it proclaimed the Savior Jesus (Acts 4:12; 13:23-26; 16:30-31). Paul especially proclaimed the universality of God’s offer of salvation (Rom 1:16; Ti 2:11). His desire was for Jews to be saved (Rom 10:1), though he primarily preached the message of salvation to the Gentiles (11:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Within the Scriptures there are many other terms associated with the concept of salvation. The new birth speaks of being made alive in Christ (“born again,” Jn 3:3). Justification envisions one’s legal standing before God, while redemption speaks more of the means of salvation—the payment of a price to bring one back to God. Reconciliation speaks of a change in relationship and propitiation, which evokes the OT sacrificial system and points to the turning away of God’s wrath. These terms and others share some common ground with the biblical concept of salvation, but all point to the person and work of Jesus Christ the Savior.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Justification, Justified; Reconciliation; Redeemer, Redemption; Savior.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SALVATION God’s way of providing people deliverance from sin and death. Scripture reveals God but it also reveals his plan to save the human race. In that sense, salvation is a major theme in both the OT and NT. In the Old Testament The concept of salvation is represented by various terms and situations in both Testaments. Among several Hebrew words that mean “deliver” or “save,” the Hebrew verb yasha‘ and derivatives are most frequently translated by English versions as “save” or “salvation....","summary_en":"SALVATION God’s way of providing people deliverance from sin and death. Scripture reveals God but it also reveals his plan to save the human race. In that sense, salvation is a major theme in both the OT and NT. In the Old Testament The concept of salvation is represented by various terms and situations in both Testaments. Among several Hebrew words that mean “deliver” or “save,” the Hebrew verb yasha‘ and derivatives are most frequently translated by English versions as “save” or “salvation....","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36156,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Spirit of God","title_en":"Spirit of God","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39882,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Amen and Amen","title_en":"Amen and Amen","content_ro":"<h3>Amen and Amen<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Two uses of “amen” by the early church focused special attention on Jesus Christ. In 2 Corinthians 1:20 (cf. Rv 1:7) “amen” is used almost as an equivalent to “yes.” Jesus is viewed as God’s means of saying yes to us, fulfilling his promises. Jesus is also viewed as our means of saying yes to God; through Jesus the “amen” response of believers is presented for the glory of God. In Revelation 3:14, “the Amen” is used as a title of Christ to emphasize his reliability and the truth of what he says (cf. Is 65:16).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The use of “amen” in the Gospels, however, is entirely different from its use in the OT, the early church, or anywhere else in Jewish literature. Excluding Matthew 6:13 (<span>kjv<\/span>) and Mark 16:20 (both passages with textual uncertainty), all of the 100 occurrences of “amen” are spoken by Jesus and always precede what is said rather than coming after as a response. In the synoptic Gospels (Mt, Mk, Lk) the form is always “Amen, I say to you”; in John it is always the doubled form “Amen, amen, I say to you” (Jn 3:3, 5, etc.). That unique use of “amen” stresses both the authority with which he taught and his majesty: Jesus’ words come with absolute certainty and are binding on all.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Amen and Amen<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Two uses of “amen” by the early church focused special attention on Jesus Christ. In 2 Corinthians 1:20 (cf. Rv 1:7) “amen” is used almost as an equivalent to “yes.” Jesus is viewed as God’s means of saying yes to us, fulfilling his promises. Jesus is also viewed as our means of saying yes to God; through Jesus the “amen” response of believers is presented for the glory of God. In Revelation 3:14, “the Amen” is used as a title of Christ to emphasize his reliability and the truth of what he says (cf. Is 65:16).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The use of “amen” in the Gospels, however, is entirely different from its use in the OT, the early church, or anywhere else in Jewish literature. Excluding Matthew 6:13 (<span>kjv<\/span>) and Mark 16:20 (both passages with textual uncertainty), all of the 100 occurrences of “amen” are spoken by Jesus and always precede what is said rather than coming after as a response. In the synoptic Gospels (Mt, Mk, Lk) the form is always “Amen, I say to you”; in John it is always the doubled form “Amen, amen, I say to you” (Jn 3:3, 5, etc.). That unique use of “amen” stresses both the authority with which he taught and his majesty: Jesus’ words come with absolute certainty and are binding on all.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Amen and Amen Two uses of “amen” by the early church focused special attention on Jesus Christ. In 2 Corinthians 1:20 (cf. Rv 1:7) “amen” is used almost as an equivalent to “yes.” Jesus is viewed as God’s means of saying yes to us, fulfilling his promises. Jesus is also viewed as our means of saying yes to God; through Jesus the “amen” response of believers is presented for the glory of God. In Revelation 3:14, “the Amen” is used as a title of Christ to emphasize his reliability and the truth...","summary_en":"Amen and Amen Two uses of “amen” by the early church focused special attention on Jesus Christ. In 2 Corinthians 1:20 (cf. Rv 1:7) “amen” is used almost as an equivalent to “yes.” Jesus is viewed as God’s means of saying yes to us, fulfilling his promises. Jesus is also viewed as our means of saying yes to God; through Jesus the “amen” response of believers is presented for the glory of God. In Revelation 3:14, “the Amen” is used as a title of Christ to emphasize his reliability and the truth...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40204,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Spiritual Blindness","title_en":"Spiritual Blindness","content_ro":"<h3>Spiritual Blindness<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Spiritual blindness is a figurative way of defining the lost and hopeless condition of sinful humanity. Such blindness includes willful rejection of God’s revelation in his creation and in Scripture, and an inability to see the truth of the gospel. Moses spoke of Israel’s apostasy as “blindness” (Dt 29:4); Isaiah called it “dim” eyes (see Is 6:10, <span>nasb<\/span>). Jesus charged the Pharisees with unbelief that made them “blind guides of the blind” (Mt 15:14; 23:16). Spiritual blindness is related to “hardness of heart” (Mk 8:17-18; Eph 4:17-18) and is understood as the judgment of God both upon unbelievers (Rom 1:20-21) and upon Israel (Is 29:10; Rom 11:7-8). According to Paul, it is also the work of Satan, who “has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe” (2 Cor 4:4). Healing from spiritual blindness is a special gift of God’s grace through the “new birth” (Jn 3:3) and by seeing “the glorious light of the Good News” (2 Cor 4:4, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p><\/blockquote>","content_en":"<h3>Spiritual Blindness<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Spiritual blindness is a figurative way of defining the lost and hopeless condition of sinful humanity. Such blindness includes willful rejection of God’s revelation in his creation and in Scripture, and an inability to see the truth of the gospel. Moses spoke of Israel’s apostasy as “blindness” (Dt 29:4); Isaiah called it “dim” eyes (see Is 6:10, <span>nasb<\/span>). Jesus charged the Pharisees with unbelief that made them “blind guides of the blind” (Mt 15:14; 23:16). Spiritual blindness is related to “hardness of heart” (Mk 8:17-18; Eph 4:17-18) and is understood as the judgment of God both upon unbelievers (Rom 1:20-21) and upon Israel (Is 29:10; Rom 11:7-8). According to Paul, it is also the work of Satan, who “has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe” (2 Cor 4:4). Healing from spiritual blindness is a special gift of God’s grace through the “new birth” (Jn 3:3) and by seeing “the glorious light of the Good News” (2 Cor 4:4, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p><\/blockquote>","summary_ro":"Spiritual Blindness Spiritual blindness is a figurative way of defining the lost and hopeless condition of sinful humanity. Such blindness includes willful rejection of God’s revelation in his creation and in Scripture, and an inability to see the truth of the gospel. Moses spoke of Israel’s apostasy as “blindness” (Dt 29:4); Isaiah called it “dim” eyes (see Is 6:10, nasb). Jesus charged the Pharisees with unbelief that made them “blind guides of the blind” (Mt 15:14; 23:16). Spiritual blindn...","summary_en":"Spiritual Blindness Spiritual blindness is a figurative way of defining the lost and hopeless condition of sinful humanity. Such blindness includes willful rejection of God’s revelation in his creation and in Scripture, and an inability to see the truth of the gospel. Moses spoke of Israel’s apostasy as “blindness” (Dt 29:4); Isaiah called it “dim” eyes (see Is 6:10, nasb). Jesus charged the Pharisees with unbelief that made them “blind guides of the blind” (Mt 15:14; 23:16). Spiritual blindn...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39754,"type":"chart","type_label":"Diagramă","type_icon":"📊","type_color":"#3b82f6","title_ro":"Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels","title_en":"Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels","content_ro":"<h3>Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels<\/h3>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p><strong>1 Peter Reference<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Gospel Reference<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:3, 23<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 3:3, 7<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:4<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 12:33<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 20:29<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 24:25-27<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:13<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 12:35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:22; 4:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 13:34; 15:12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:4, 7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mk 12:10; Mt 21:42<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mt 5:16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:19-20<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 6:32-35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:25<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 10:11, 14<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>3:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 6:27-28<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>4:13<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mt 5:12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>5:3<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 22:24-27<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>5:5-6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 14:11; 18:14<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","content_en":"<h3>Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels<\/h3>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p><strong>1 Peter Reference<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Gospel Reference<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:3, 23<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 3:3, 7<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:4<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 12:33<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 20:29<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 24:25-27<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:13<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 12:35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:22; 4:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 13:34; 15:12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:4, 7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mk 12:10; Mt 21:42<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mt 5:16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:19-20<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 6:32-35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:25<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 10:11, 14<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>3:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 6:27-28<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>4:13<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mt 5:12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>5:3<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 22:24-27<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>5:5-6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 14:11; 18:14<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","summary_ro":"Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels 1 Peter Reference Gospel Reference 1:3, 23 Jn 3:3, 7 1:4 Lk 12:33 1:8 Jn 20:29 1:10-12 Lk 24:25-27 1:13 Lk 12:35 1:22; 4:8 Jn 13:34; 15:12 2:4, 7 Mk 12:10; Mt 21:42 2:12 Mt 5:16 2:19-20 Lk 6:32-35 2:25 Jn 10:11, 14 3:9 Lk 6:27-28 4:13 Mt 5:12 5:3 Lk 22:24-27 5:5-6 Lk 14:11; 18:14","summary_en":"Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels 1 Peter Reference Gospel Reference 1:3, 23 Jn 3:3, 7 1:4 Lk 12:33 1:8 Jn 20:29 1:10-12 Lk 24:25-27 1:13 Lk 12:35 1:22; 4:8 Jn 13:34; 15:12 2:4, 7 Mk 12:10; Mt 21:42 2:12 Mt 5:16 2:19-20 Lk 6:32-35 2:25 Jn 10:11, 14 3:9 Lk 6:27-28 4:13 Mt 5:12 5:3 Lk 22:24-27 5:5-6 Lk 14:11; 18:14","source":"Charts\/Charts.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56354,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:3<\/strong> <em>born again:<\/em> Or <em>born from above.<\/em> John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:3<\/strong> <em>born again:<\/em> Or <em>born from above.<\/em> John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:3 born again: Or born from above. John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.","summary_en":"3:3 born again: Or born from above. John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83980,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:3<\/strong> <em>born again:<\/em> Or <em>born from above.<\/em> John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:3<\/strong> <em>born again:<\/em> Or <em>born from above.<\/em> John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:3 born again: Or born from above. John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.","summary_en":"3:3 born again: Or born from above. John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111606,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:3<\/strong> <em>born again:<\/em> Or <em>born from above.<\/em> John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:3<\/strong> <em>born again:<\/em> Or <em>born from above.<\/em> John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:3 born again: Or born from above. John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.","summary_en":"3:3 born again: Or born from above. John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139232,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:3<\/strong> <em>born again:<\/em> Or <em>born from above.<\/em> John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:3<\/strong> <em>born again:<\/em> Or <em>born from above.<\/em> John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:3 born again: Or born from above. John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.","summary_en":"3:3 born again: Or born from above. John’s expression “from above” (3:31; 19:11) means “from God.” To experience spiritual rebirth, a person must be completely renewed through God’s power. • Nicodemus interpreted Jesus’ words physically; he demonstrated that those in darkness, who do not have spiritual rebirth, cannot understand Jesus or other “heavenly things” (3:12). Jesus sometimes used ironic misunderstanding as a teaching strategy.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60040,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Blessing","title_en":"Blessing","content_ro":"<h3>Blessing<\/h3>\n<p>Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev 26:3-13). Obedience leads to blessing, whereas rebellion brings a curse (see Deut 28).<\/p>\n<p>The initial realm of blessing is creation, in which God as Creator is the ultimate granter of blessing for animals (Gen 1:22) and humans (1:28; see Pss 104; 128:3-4). Humans also serve as channels of divine blessing. Abraham was called to be a blessing to the nations (Gen 12:2-3). The institutions of family (27:27-29), government (1 Kgs 8:14, 52, 66), and religion (Gen 14:19; Lev 9:22) are nurtured, commissioned, and purified through blessing. Israel’s priests mediated God’s blessing to Israel (Num 6:24-26; Deut 10:8).<\/p>\n<p>Three basic characteristics can be observed in Old Testament blessings: (1) They are conveyed from a greater party to a lesser one (Gen 32:26; Heb 7:6-7); (2) they are signs of favor that result in well-being and productivity (Deut 28:3-7); and (3) they acknowledge that all power and blessing stems from the Creator. All blessings have their source in God’s love (Deut 7:7-8, 12-15).<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessings in the Old Testament are in striking contrast with those of the pagan religions of antiquity. For pagan religions, fortunes and fertility of flock, family, and fields came about through sympathetic magic in ceremonial observances at their shrines—profane customs that were designed to manipulate the deities to act on their behalf so that the cycle of life could be maintained. In the Old Testament, all life, fertility, and blessing came by God’s decree, for he is the only true and living God.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, the emphasis of blessing shifts from the material to the spiritual, from the nation to the church, and from the temporal to the eternal (Matt 6:25; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 3:9). In his death, Jesus carried the consequences of sin’s curse (Gal 3:13), established God’s Kingdom (Matt 3:2; 5:3-20; John 3:3-5), and blessed its citizens with forgiveness of sin (Rom 4:6-25). Now believers are called to bless the world (Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; see also Isa 19:24; Zech 8:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:22, 28; 9:26-27; 12:2-3; 14:19-20; 24:59-60; 27:1-41; 28:1-4; 32:24-30; 46:1–50:26; Lev 26:3-13; Num 6:22-27; Deut 7:12-15; 10:8; 28:1-14; 33:1-29; 1 Sam 2:20-21; Ps 128:1-6; Matt 5:3-12; Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; Gal 3:13-14; Eph 1:3; Heb 7:6-7; 1 Pet 3:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Blessing<\/h3>\n<p>Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev 26:3-13). Obedience leads to blessing, whereas rebellion brings a curse (see Deut 28).<\/p>\n<p>The initial realm of blessing is creation, in which God as Creator is the ultimate granter of blessing for animals (Gen 1:22) and humans (1:28; see Pss 104; 128:3-4). Humans also serve as channels of divine blessing. Abraham was called to be a blessing to the nations (Gen 12:2-3). The institutions of family (27:27-29), government (1 Kgs 8:14, 52, 66), and religion (Gen 14:19; Lev 9:22) are nurtured, commissioned, and purified through blessing. Israel’s priests mediated God’s blessing to Israel (Num 6:24-26; Deut 10:8).<\/p>\n<p>Three basic characteristics can be observed in Old Testament blessings: (1) They are conveyed from a greater party to a lesser one (Gen 32:26; Heb 7:6-7); (2) they are signs of favor that result in well-being and productivity (Deut 28:3-7); and (3) they acknowledge that all power and blessing stems from the Creator. All blessings have their source in God’s love (Deut 7:7-8, 12-15).<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessings in the Old Testament are in striking contrast with those of the pagan religions of antiquity. For pagan religions, fortunes and fertility of flock, family, and fields came about through sympathetic magic in ceremonial observances at their shrines—profane customs that were designed to manipulate the deities to act on their behalf so that the cycle of life could be maintained. In the Old Testament, all life, fertility, and blessing came by God’s decree, for he is the only true and living God.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, the emphasis of blessing shifts from the material to the spiritual, from the nation to the church, and from the temporal to the eternal (Matt 6:25; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 3:9). In his death, Jesus carried the consequences of sin’s curse (Gal 3:13), established God’s Kingdom (Matt 3:2; 5:3-20; John 3:3-5), and blessed its citizens with forgiveness of sin (Rom 4:6-25). Now believers are called to bless the world (Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; see also Isa 19:24; Zech 8:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:22, 28; 9:26-27; 12:2-3; 14:19-20; 24:59-60; 27:1-41; 28:1-4; 32:24-30; 46:1–50:26; Lev 26:3-13; Num 6:22-27; Deut 7:12-15; 10:8; 28:1-14; 33:1-29; 1 Sam 2:20-21; Ps 128:1-6; Matt 5:3-12; Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; Gal 3:13-14; Eph 1:3; Heb 7:6-7; 1 Pet 3:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Blessing Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev...","summary_en":"Blessing Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66387,"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":67824,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Community","title_en":"The New Community","content_ro":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","summary_en":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87666,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Blessing","title_en":"Blessing","content_ro":"<h3>Blessing<\/h3>\n<p>Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev 26:3-13). Obedience leads to blessing, whereas rebellion brings a curse (see Deut 28).<\/p>\n<p>The initial realm of blessing is creation, in which God as Creator is the ultimate granter of blessing for animals (Gen 1:22) and humans (1:28; see Pss 104; 128:3-4). Humans also serve as channels of divine blessing. Abraham was called to be a blessing to the nations (Gen 12:2-3). The institutions of family (27:27-29), government (1 Kgs 8:14, 52, 66), and religion (Gen 14:19; Lev 9:22) are nurtured, commissioned, and purified through blessing. Israel’s priests mediated God’s blessing to Israel (Num 6:24-26; Deut 10:8).<\/p>\n<p>Three basic characteristics can be observed in Old Testament blessings: (1) They are conveyed from a greater party to a lesser one (Gen 32:26; Heb 7:6-7); (2) they are signs of favor that result in well-being and productivity (Deut 28:3-7); and (3) they acknowledge that all power and blessing stems from the Creator. All blessings have their source in God’s love (Deut 7:7-8, 12-15).<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessings in the Old Testament are in striking contrast with those of the pagan religions of antiquity. For pagan religions, fortunes and fertility of flock, family, and fields came about through sympathetic magic in ceremonial observances at their shrines—profane customs that were designed to manipulate the deities to act on their behalf so that the cycle of life could be maintained. In the Old Testament, all life, fertility, and blessing came by God’s decree, for he is the only true and living God.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, the emphasis of blessing shifts from the material to the spiritual, from the nation to the church, and from the temporal to the eternal (Matt 6:25; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 3:9). In his death, Jesus carried the consequences of sin’s curse (Gal 3:13), established God’s Kingdom (Matt 3:2; 5:3-20; John 3:3-5), and blessed its citizens with forgiveness of sin (Rom 4:6-25). Now believers are called to bless the world (Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; see also Isa 19:24; Zech 8:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:22, 28; 9:26-27; 12:2-3; 14:19-20; 24:59-60; 27:1-41; 28:1-4; 32:24-30; 46:1–50:26; Lev 26:3-13; Num 6:22-27; Deut 7:12-15; 10:8; 28:1-14; 33:1-29; 1 Sam 2:20-21; Ps 128:1-6; Matt 5:3-12; Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; Gal 3:13-14; Eph 1:3; Heb 7:6-7; 1 Pet 3:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Blessing<\/h3>\n<p>Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev 26:3-13). Obedience leads to blessing, whereas rebellion brings a curse (see Deut 28).<\/p>\n<p>The initial realm of blessing is creation, in which God as Creator is the ultimate granter of blessing for animals (Gen 1:22) and humans (1:28; see Pss 104; 128:3-4). Humans also serve as channels of divine blessing. Abraham was called to be a blessing to the nations (Gen 12:2-3). The institutions of family (27:27-29), government (1 Kgs 8:14, 52, 66), and religion (Gen 14:19; Lev 9:22) are nurtured, commissioned, and purified through blessing. Israel’s priests mediated God’s blessing to Israel (Num 6:24-26; Deut 10:8).<\/p>\n<p>Three basic characteristics can be observed in Old Testament blessings: (1) They are conveyed from a greater party to a lesser one (Gen 32:26; Heb 7:6-7); (2) they are signs of favor that result in well-being and productivity (Deut 28:3-7); and (3) they acknowledge that all power and blessing stems from the Creator. All blessings have their source in God’s love (Deut 7:7-8, 12-15).<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessings in the Old Testament are in striking contrast with those of the pagan religions of antiquity. For pagan religions, fortunes and fertility of flock, family, and fields came about through sympathetic magic in ceremonial observances at their shrines—profane customs that were designed to manipulate the deities to act on their behalf so that the cycle of life could be maintained. In the Old Testament, all life, fertility, and blessing came by God’s decree, for he is the only true and living God.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, the emphasis of blessing shifts from the material to the spiritual, from the nation to the church, and from the temporal to the eternal (Matt 6:25; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 3:9). In his death, Jesus carried the consequences of sin’s curse (Gal 3:13), established God’s Kingdom (Matt 3:2; 5:3-20; John 3:3-5), and blessed its citizens with forgiveness of sin (Rom 4:6-25). Now believers are called to bless the world (Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; see also Isa 19:24; Zech 8:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:22, 28; 9:26-27; 12:2-3; 14:19-20; 24:59-60; 27:1-41; 28:1-4; 32:24-30; 46:1–50:26; Lev 26:3-13; Num 6:22-27; Deut 7:12-15; 10:8; 28:1-14; 33:1-29; 1 Sam 2:20-21; Ps 128:1-6; Matt 5:3-12; Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; Gal 3:13-14; Eph 1:3; Heb 7:6-7; 1 Pet 3:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Blessing Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev...","summary_en":"Blessing Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94013,"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":95450,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Community","title_en":"The New Community","content_ro":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","summary_en":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115292,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Blessing","title_en":"Blessing","content_ro":"<h3>Blessing<\/h3>\n<p>Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev 26:3-13). Obedience leads to blessing, whereas rebellion brings a curse (see Deut 28).<\/p>\n<p>The initial realm of blessing is creation, in which God as Creator is the ultimate granter of blessing for animals (Gen 1:22) and humans (1:28; see Pss 104; 128:3-4). Humans also serve as channels of divine blessing. Abraham was called to be a blessing to the nations (Gen 12:2-3). The institutions of family (27:27-29), government (1 Kgs 8:14, 52, 66), and religion (Gen 14:19; Lev 9:22) are nurtured, commissioned, and purified through blessing. Israel’s priests mediated God’s blessing to Israel (Num 6:24-26; Deut 10:8).<\/p>\n<p>Three basic characteristics can be observed in Old Testament blessings: (1) They are conveyed from a greater party to a lesser one (Gen 32:26; Heb 7:6-7); (2) they are signs of favor that result in well-being and productivity (Deut 28:3-7); and (3) they acknowledge that all power and blessing stems from the Creator. All blessings have their source in God’s love (Deut 7:7-8, 12-15).<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessings in the Old Testament are in striking contrast with those of the pagan religions of antiquity. For pagan religions, fortunes and fertility of flock, family, and fields came about through sympathetic magic in ceremonial observances at their shrines—profane customs that were designed to manipulate the deities to act on their behalf so that the cycle of life could be maintained. In the Old Testament, all life, fertility, and blessing came by God’s decree, for he is the only true and living God.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, the emphasis of blessing shifts from the material to the spiritual, from the nation to the church, and from the temporal to the eternal (Matt 6:25; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 3:9). In his death, Jesus carried the consequences of sin’s curse (Gal 3:13), established God’s Kingdom (Matt 3:2; 5:3-20; John 3:3-5), and blessed its citizens with forgiveness of sin (Rom 4:6-25). Now believers are called to bless the world (Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; see also Isa 19:24; Zech 8:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:22, 28; 9:26-27; 12:2-3; 14:19-20; 24:59-60; 27:1-41; 28:1-4; 32:24-30; 46:1–50:26; Lev 26:3-13; Num 6:22-27; Deut 7:12-15; 10:8; 28:1-14; 33:1-29; 1 Sam 2:20-21; Ps 128:1-6; Matt 5:3-12; Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; Gal 3:13-14; Eph 1:3; Heb 7:6-7; 1 Pet 3:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Blessing<\/h3>\n<p>Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev 26:3-13). Obedience leads to blessing, whereas rebellion brings a curse (see Deut 28).<\/p>\n<p>The initial realm of blessing is creation, in which God as Creator is the ultimate granter of blessing for animals (Gen 1:22) and humans (1:28; see Pss 104; 128:3-4). Humans also serve as channels of divine blessing. Abraham was called to be a blessing to the nations (Gen 12:2-3). The institutions of family (27:27-29), government (1 Kgs 8:14, 52, 66), and religion (Gen 14:19; Lev 9:22) are nurtured, commissioned, and purified through blessing. Israel’s priests mediated God’s blessing to Israel (Num 6:24-26; Deut 10:8).<\/p>\n<p>Three basic characteristics can be observed in Old Testament blessings: (1) They are conveyed from a greater party to a lesser one (Gen 32:26; Heb 7:6-7); (2) they are signs of favor that result in well-being and productivity (Deut 28:3-7); and (3) they acknowledge that all power and blessing stems from the Creator. All blessings have their source in God’s love (Deut 7:7-8, 12-15).<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessings in the Old Testament are in striking contrast with those of the pagan religions of antiquity. For pagan religions, fortunes and fertility of flock, family, and fields came about through sympathetic magic in ceremonial observances at their shrines—profane customs that were designed to manipulate the deities to act on their behalf so that the cycle of life could be maintained. In the Old Testament, all life, fertility, and blessing came by God’s decree, for he is the only true and living God.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, the emphasis of blessing shifts from the material to the spiritual, from the nation to the church, and from the temporal to the eternal (Matt 6:25; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 3:9). In his death, Jesus carried the consequences of sin’s curse (Gal 3:13), established God’s Kingdom (Matt 3:2; 5:3-20; John 3:3-5), and blessed its citizens with forgiveness of sin (Rom 4:6-25). Now believers are called to bless the world (Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; see also Isa 19:24; Zech 8:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:22, 28; 9:26-27; 12:2-3; 14:19-20; 24:59-60; 27:1-41; 28:1-4; 32:24-30; 46:1–50:26; Lev 26:3-13; Num 6:22-27; Deut 7:12-15; 10:8; 28:1-14; 33:1-29; 1 Sam 2:20-21; Ps 128:1-6; Matt 5:3-12; Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; Gal 3:13-14; Eph 1:3; Heb 7:6-7; 1 Pet 3:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Blessing Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev...","summary_en":"Blessing Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121639,"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":123076,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Community","title_en":"The New Community","content_ro":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","summary_en":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142918,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Blessing","title_en":"Blessing","content_ro":"<h3>Blessing<\/h3>\n<p>Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev 26:3-13). Obedience leads to blessing, whereas rebellion brings a curse (see Deut 28).<\/p>\n<p>The initial realm of blessing is creation, in which God as Creator is the ultimate granter of blessing for animals (Gen 1:22) and humans (1:28; see Pss 104; 128:3-4). Humans also serve as channels of divine blessing. Abraham was called to be a blessing to the nations (Gen 12:2-3). The institutions of family (27:27-29), government (1 Kgs 8:14, 52, 66), and religion (Gen 14:19; Lev 9:22) are nurtured, commissioned, and purified through blessing. Israel’s priests mediated God’s blessing to Israel (Num 6:24-26; Deut 10:8).<\/p>\n<p>Three basic characteristics can be observed in Old Testament blessings: (1) They are conveyed from a greater party to a lesser one (Gen 32:26; Heb 7:6-7); (2) they are signs of favor that result in well-being and productivity (Deut 28:3-7); and (3) they acknowledge that all power and blessing stems from the Creator. All blessings have their source in God’s love (Deut 7:7-8, 12-15).<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessings in the Old Testament are in striking contrast with those of the pagan religions of antiquity. For pagan religions, fortunes and fertility of flock, family, and fields came about through sympathetic magic in ceremonial observances at their shrines—profane customs that were designed to manipulate the deities to act on their behalf so that the cycle of life could be maintained. In the Old Testament, all life, fertility, and blessing came by God’s decree, for he is the only true and living God.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, the emphasis of blessing shifts from the material to the spiritual, from the nation to the church, and from the temporal to the eternal (Matt 6:25; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 3:9). In his death, Jesus carried the consequences of sin’s curse (Gal 3:13), established God’s Kingdom (Matt 3:2; 5:3-20; John 3:3-5), and blessed its citizens with forgiveness of sin (Rom 4:6-25). Now believers are called to bless the world (Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; see also Isa 19:24; Zech 8:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:22, 28; 9:26-27; 12:2-3; 14:19-20; 24:59-60; 27:1-41; 28:1-4; 32:24-30; 46:1–50:26; Lev 26:3-13; Num 6:22-27; Deut 7:12-15; 10:8; 28:1-14; 33:1-29; 1 Sam 2:20-21; Ps 128:1-6; Matt 5:3-12; Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; Gal 3:13-14; Eph 1:3; Heb 7:6-7; 1 Pet 3:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Blessing<\/h3>\n<p>Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev 26:3-13). Obedience leads to blessing, whereas rebellion brings a curse (see Deut 28).<\/p>\n<p>The initial realm of blessing is creation, in which God as Creator is the ultimate granter of blessing for animals (Gen 1:22) and humans (1:28; see Pss 104; 128:3-4). Humans also serve as channels of divine blessing. Abraham was called to be a blessing to the nations (Gen 12:2-3). The institutions of family (27:27-29), government (1 Kgs 8:14, 52, 66), and religion (Gen 14:19; Lev 9:22) are nurtured, commissioned, and purified through blessing. Israel’s priests mediated God’s blessing to Israel (Num 6:24-26; Deut 10:8).<\/p>\n<p>Three basic characteristics can be observed in Old Testament blessings: (1) They are conveyed from a greater party to a lesser one (Gen 32:26; Heb 7:6-7); (2) they are signs of favor that result in well-being and productivity (Deut 28:3-7); and (3) they acknowledge that all power and blessing stems from the Creator. All blessings have their source in God’s love (Deut 7:7-8, 12-15).<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessings in the Old Testament are in striking contrast with those of the pagan religions of antiquity. For pagan religions, fortunes and fertility of flock, family, and fields came about through sympathetic magic in ceremonial observances at their shrines—profane customs that were designed to manipulate the deities to act on their behalf so that the cycle of life could be maintained. In the Old Testament, all life, fertility, and blessing came by God’s decree, for he is the only true and living God.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, the emphasis of blessing shifts from the material to the spiritual, from the nation to the church, and from the temporal to the eternal (Matt 6:25; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 3:9). In his death, Jesus carried the consequences of sin’s curse (Gal 3:13), established God’s Kingdom (Matt 3:2; 5:3-20; John 3:3-5), and blessed its citizens with forgiveness of sin (Rom 4:6-25). Now believers are called to bless the world (Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; see also Isa 19:24; Zech 8:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:22, 28; 9:26-27; 12:2-3; 14:19-20; 24:59-60; 27:1-41; 28:1-4; 32:24-30; 46:1–50:26; Lev 26:3-13; Num 6:22-27; Deut 7:12-15; 10:8; 28:1-14; 33:1-29; 1 Sam 2:20-21; Ps 128:1-6; Matt 5:3-12; Luke 6:27-28; Rom 12:14; Gal 3:13-14; Eph 1:3; Heb 7:6-7; 1 Pet 3:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Blessing Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev...","summary_en":"Blessing Before his death, Jacob offered a blessing to each of his sons (49:1-28), as well as to Joseph’s sons (Gen 48:3-20), just as his father Isaac had blessed him (27:27-29). Blessing enables, enhances, and enriches life, whereas a curse diminishes it (Lev 26:14-39). A blessing is issued publicly by a benefactor and provides power for prosperity and success. Blessing is essential to covenant relationships in that it guides and motivates the parties to obey the covenant’s stipulations (Lev...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149265,"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":150702,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Community","title_en":"The New Community","content_ro":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","summary_en":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":28852,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Paradox*","title_en":"Paradox*","content_ro":"<h3>Paradox*<\/h3>\n<p>Form of expression that seems to be either self-contradictory or absurd but at another level expresses fundamental truth. It is often employed to get hearers to think at a deeper and more critical level. It may often be closely related to hyperbole, an exaggerated statement, except that for the paradox there is an apparent element of contradiction, which arrests attention and demands consideration.<\/p>\n<p>In the ministry of Jesus one finds it in such expressions as grown persons being born again. “Can a man enter a second time into his mother’s womb,” Nicodemus asks, “and be born?” (Jn 3:4). Or again, in response to the attempts of rich men to enter the kingdom, Jesus says that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle (an impossibility) than for a rich man to enter the kingdom (Mk 10:25). The point is not to focus on the literal statement or take it word for word but to understand its essential purpose. In this instance, it is a form of “shock treatment” to force the wealthy to see how their attitudes toward wealth have excluded them from the kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Much of the use of paradox in Jesus’ ministry has to do with his attempts to show that the perspective, or value system, of the kingdom represents a complete reversal of the values by which people live. Whosoever will lose his life will find it (Mt 10:39). The last shall be first, and the first last (Lk 13:30). Whoever would be greatest of all must be servant of all (Mk 10:43; Lk 22:26). Indeed, the servant ministry of Jesus himself underscores this great reversal of the kingdom. After washing the feet of the disciples, Jesus says, “You call me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet” (Jn 13:13-14, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Paradox also enters Christian expression when one attempts to speak of God in the language of men. Thus God is “before all time.” Even “God in flesh” is paradoxical yet profoundly true. People inevitably and of necessity speak of God in terms of their own experience, yet God cannot be limited by such experience or language, for he is infinitely greater. Hence, language is a limited instrument for speaking of him who is not limited.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Paradox*<\/h3>\n<p>Form of expression that seems to be either self-contradictory or absurd but at another level expresses fundamental truth. It is often employed to get hearers to think at a deeper and more critical level. It may often be closely related to hyperbole, an exaggerated statement, except that for the paradox there is an apparent element of contradiction, which arrests attention and demands consideration.<\/p>\n<p>In the ministry of Jesus one finds it in such expressions as grown persons being born again. “Can a man enter a second time into his mother’s womb,” Nicodemus asks, “and be born?” (Jn 3:4). Or again, in response to the attempts of rich men to enter the kingdom, Jesus says that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle (an impossibility) than for a rich man to enter the kingdom (Mk 10:25). The point is not to focus on the literal statement or take it word for word but to understand its essential purpose. In this instance, it is a form of “shock treatment” to force the wealthy to see how their attitudes toward wealth have excluded them from the kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Much of the use of paradox in Jesus’ ministry has to do with his attempts to show that the perspective, or value system, of the kingdom represents a complete reversal of the values by which people live. Whosoever will lose his life will find it (Mt 10:39). The last shall be first, and the first last (Lk 13:30). Whoever would be greatest of all must be servant of all (Mk 10:43; Lk 22:26). Indeed, the servant ministry of Jesus himself underscores this great reversal of the kingdom. After washing the feet of the disciples, Jesus says, “You call me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet” (Jn 13:13-14, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Paradox also enters Christian expression when one attempts to speak of God in the language of men. Thus God is “before all time.” Even “God in flesh” is paradoxical yet profoundly true. People inevitably and of necessity speak of God in terms of their own experience, yet God cannot be limited by such experience or language, for he is infinitely greater. Hence, language is a limited instrument for speaking of him who is not limited.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Paradox* Form of expression that seems to be either self-contradictory or absurd but at another level expresses fundamental truth. It is often employed to get hearers to think at a deeper and more critical level. It may often be closely related to hyperbole, an exaggerated statement, except that for the paradox there is an apparent element of contradiction, which arrests attention and demands consideration. In the ministry of Jesus one finds it in such expressions as grown persons being born ...","summary_en":"Paradox* Form of expression that seems to be either self-contradictory or absurd but at another level expresses fundamental truth. It is often employed to get hearers to think at a deeper and more critical level. It may often be closely related to hyperbole, an exaggerated statement, except that for the paradox there is an apparent element of contradiction, which arrests attention and demands consideration. In the ministry of Jesus one finds it in such expressions as grown persons being born ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65904,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93530,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121156,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148782,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":16552,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Holiness","title_en":"Holiness","content_ro":"<h3>HOLINESS<\/h3>\n<p>Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct from his creation and exercises sovereign majesty and power over it. His holiness is especially prominent in the Psalms (47:8) and the Prophets (Ez 39:7), where “holiness” emerges as a synonym for Israel’s God. Thus, Scripture ascribes to God the title “Holy” (Is 57:15), “Holy One” (Jb 6:10; Is 43:15), and “Holy One of Israel” (Ps 89:18; Is 60:14; Jer 50:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God’s holiness denotes that the Lord is separate from all that is evil and defiled (cf. Jb 34:10). His holy character is the standard of absolute moral perfection (Is 5:16). God’s holiness—his transcendent majesty and the purity of his character—are skillfully balanced in Psalm 99. Verses 1 through 3 portray God’s distance from the finite and earthbound, whereas verses 4 and 5 emphasize his separation from sin and evil.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God demanded holiness in the lives of his people. Through Moses, God said to the congregation of Israel, “You shall be holy; for I the <span>Lord<\/span> your God am holy” (Lv 19:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). The holiness enjoined by the OT was twofold: (1) external, or ceremonial; and (2) internal, or moral and spiritual. OT ceremonial holiness, prescribed in the Pentateuch (the first five books of the OT) included ritual consecration to God’s service. Thus priests and Levites were sanctified by a complex process of ritual consecration (Ex 29), as were the Hebrew Nazirites, which means “separated ones” (Nm 6:1-21). Prophets like Elisha (2 Kgs 4:9) and Jeremiah (Jer 1:5) were also sanctified for a special prophetic ministry in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>But the OT also draws attention to the inner, moral, and spiritual aspects of holiness. Men and women, created in the image of God, are called to cultivate the holiness of God’s own character in their lives (Lv 19:2; Nm 15:40). In the NT the ceremonial holiness prominent in the Pentateuch recedes to the background. Whereas much of Judaism in Jesus’ time sought a ceremonial holiness by works (Mk 7:1-5), the NT stresses the ethical rather than the formal dimension of holiness (vv 6-12). With the coming of the Holy Spirit, the early church perceived that holiness of life was a profound internal reality that should govern an individual’s thought and attitudes in relation to persons and objects in the external world.<\/p>\n<p>The NT Greek equivalent of the common Hebrew word for holiness signifies an inner state of freedom from moral fault and a relative harmony with the moral perfection of God. The word “godlikeness” or “godliness” captures the sense of the primary Greek word for holiness. Another Greek word approximates the dominant OT concept of holiness as external separation from the profane and dedication to the service of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Because the NT writers assumed the OT portrait of deity, holiness is ascribed to God in relatively few apostolic texts. Jesus affirmed the ethical nature of God when he enjoined his disciples to pray that the Father’s name might be esteemed for what it is: “Hallowed be thy name” (Mt 6:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). In the book of Revelation the Father’s moral perfection is extolled with the threefold ascription of holiness borrowed from Isaiah: “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come” (Rv 4:8, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Is 6:3). Luke, however, contemplated God’s holiness in terms of the dominant OT concept of his transcendence and majesty (Lk 1:49).<\/p>\n<p>Similarly the holiness of Jesus Christ is asserted in the NT. Luke (Lk 1:35; 4:34), Peter (Acts 3:14; 4:27-30), the writer of Hebrews (Heb 7:26), and John (Rv 3:7) ascribe holiness to both the Father and the Son.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Spirit comes from God, discloses his holy character, and is the instrument of God’s holy purposes in the world, he also is absolutely holy (Mt 1:18; 3:16; 28:19; Lk 1:15; 4:14). The common title “Holy Spirit” underscores the ethical perfection of the third person of the Godhead (Jn 3:5-8; 14:16-17, 26).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, holiness also characterizes Christ’s church. The apostle Paul taught that Christ loved the church and died for it “that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word” (Eph 5:26, <span>rsv<\/span>). Peter addressed the church as a holy people in language borrowed from the OT. Separated from the unbelieving nations and consecrated to the Lord, the church is “a holy nation” (1 Pt 2:9; cf. Ex 19:6).<\/p>\n<p>But the NT more often discusses holiness in relation to individual Christians. Believers in Christ are frequently designated as “saints,” literally meaning “holy ones,” since through faith God justifies sinners, pronouncing them “holy” in his sight. A justified sinner is by no means morally perfect, but God does declare believers to be guiltless. Thus, although Christians at Corinth, for example, were plagued with numerous sins, Paul could address his erring friends as those who were “sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). Despite their problems, the Corinthian believers were “holy ones” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The NT, however, places great stress upon the reality of practical holiness in the Christian’s daily experience. The God who freely declares a person righteous through faith in Christ commands that the believer progress in holiness of life. In God’s plan, a growth in holiness should accompany believing. God graciously provides the spiritual resources to enable Christians to be “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOLINESS<\/h3>\n<p>Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct from his creation and exercises sovereign majesty and power over it. His holiness is especially prominent in the Psalms (47:8) and the Prophets (Ez 39:7), where “holiness” emerges as a synonym for Israel’s God. Thus, Scripture ascribes to God the title “Holy” (Is 57:15), “Holy One” (Jb 6:10; Is 43:15), and “Holy One of Israel” (Ps 89:18; Is 60:14; Jer 50:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God’s holiness denotes that the Lord is separate from all that is evil and defiled (cf. Jb 34:10). His holy character is the standard of absolute moral perfection (Is 5:16). God’s holiness—his transcendent majesty and the purity of his character—are skillfully balanced in Psalm 99. Verses 1 through 3 portray God’s distance from the finite and earthbound, whereas verses 4 and 5 emphasize his separation from sin and evil.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God demanded holiness in the lives of his people. Through Moses, God said to the congregation of Israel, “You shall be holy; for I the <span>Lord<\/span> your God am holy” (Lv 19:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). The holiness enjoined by the OT was twofold: (1) external, or ceremonial; and (2) internal, or moral and spiritual. OT ceremonial holiness, prescribed in the Pentateuch (the first five books of the OT) included ritual consecration to God’s service. Thus priests and Levites were sanctified by a complex process of ritual consecration (Ex 29), as were the Hebrew Nazirites, which means “separated ones” (Nm 6:1-21). Prophets like Elisha (2 Kgs 4:9) and Jeremiah (Jer 1:5) were also sanctified for a special prophetic ministry in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>But the OT also draws attention to the inner, moral, and spiritual aspects of holiness. Men and women, created in the image of God, are called to cultivate the holiness of God’s own character in their lives (Lv 19:2; Nm 15:40). In the NT the ceremonial holiness prominent in the Pentateuch recedes to the background. Whereas much of Judaism in Jesus’ time sought a ceremonial holiness by works (Mk 7:1-5), the NT stresses the ethical rather than the formal dimension of holiness (vv 6-12). With the coming of the Holy Spirit, the early church perceived that holiness of life was a profound internal reality that should govern an individual’s thought and attitudes in relation to persons and objects in the external world.<\/p>\n<p>The NT Greek equivalent of the common Hebrew word for holiness signifies an inner state of freedom from moral fault and a relative harmony with the moral perfection of God. The word “godlikeness” or “godliness” captures the sense of the primary Greek word for holiness. Another Greek word approximates the dominant OT concept of holiness as external separation from the profane and dedication to the service of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Because the NT writers assumed the OT portrait of deity, holiness is ascribed to God in relatively few apostolic texts. Jesus affirmed the ethical nature of God when he enjoined his disciples to pray that the Father’s name might be esteemed for what it is: “Hallowed be thy name” (Mt 6:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). In the book of Revelation the Father’s moral perfection is extolled with the threefold ascription of holiness borrowed from Isaiah: “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come” (Rv 4:8, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Is 6:3). Luke, however, contemplated God’s holiness in terms of the dominant OT concept of his transcendence and majesty (Lk 1:49).<\/p>\n<p>Similarly the holiness of Jesus Christ is asserted in the NT. Luke (Lk 1:35; 4:34), Peter (Acts 3:14; 4:27-30), the writer of Hebrews (Heb 7:26), and John (Rv 3:7) ascribe holiness to both the Father and the Son.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Spirit comes from God, discloses his holy character, and is the instrument of God’s holy purposes in the world, he also is absolutely holy (Mt 1:18; 3:16; 28:19; Lk 1:15; 4:14). The common title “Holy Spirit” underscores the ethical perfection of the third person of the Godhead (Jn 3:5-8; 14:16-17, 26).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, holiness also characterizes Christ’s church. The apostle Paul taught that Christ loved the church and died for it “that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word” (Eph 5:26, <span>rsv<\/span>). Peter addressed the church as a holy people in language borrowed from the OT. Separated from the unbelieving nations and consecrated to the Lord, the church is “a holy nation” (1 Pt 2:9; cf. Ex 19:6).<\/p>\n<p>But the NT more often discusses holiness in relation to individual Christians. Believers in Christ are frequently designated as “saints,” literally meaning “holy ones,” since through faith God justifies sinners, pronouncing them “holy” in his sight. A justified sinner is by no means morally perfect, but God does declare believers to be guiltless. Thus, although Christians at Corinth, for example, were plagued with numerous sins, Paul could address his erring friends as those who were “sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). Despite their problems, the Corinthian believers were “holy ones” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The NT, however, places great stress upon the reality of practical holiness in the Christian’s daily experience. The God who freely declares a person righteous through faith in Christ commands that the believer progress in holiness of life. In God’s plan, a growth in holiness should accompany believing. God graciously provides the spiritual resources to enable Christians to be “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOLINESS Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure. In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct ...","summary_en":"HOLINESS Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure. In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct ...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56355,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:5<\/strong> John the Baptist baptized with <em>water<\/em><em>;<\/em> Jesus baptizes with <em>the Spirit<\/em> (1:33).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:5<\/strong> John the Baptist baptized with <em>water<\/em><em>;<\/em> Jesus baptizes with <em>the Spirit<\/em> (1:33).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:5 John the Baptist baptized with water; Jesus baptizes with the Spirit (1:33).","summary_en":"3:5 John the Baptist baptized with water; Jesus baptizes with the Spirit (1:33).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83981,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:5<\/strong> John the Baptist baptized with <em>water<\/em><em>;<\/em> Jesus baptizes with <em>the Spirit<\/em> (1:33).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:5<\/strong> John the Baptist baptized with <em>water<\/em><em>;<\/em> Jesus baptizes with <em>the Spirit<\/em> (1:33).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:5 John the Baptist baptized with water; Jesus baptizes with the Spirit (1:33).","summary_en":"3:5 John the Baptist baptized with water; Jesus baptizes with the Spirit (1:33).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111607,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:5<\/strong> John the Baptist baptized with <em>water<\/em><em>;<\/em> Jesus baptizes with <em>the Spirit<\/em> (1:33).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:5<\/strong> John the Baptist baptized with <em>water<\/em><em>;<\/em> Jesus baptizes with <em>the Spirit<\/em> (1:33).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:5 John the Baptist baptized with water; Jesus baptizes with the Spirit (1:33).","summary_en":"3:5 John the Baptist baptized with water; Jesus baptizes with the Spirit (1:33).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139233,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:5<\/strong> John the Baptist baptized with <em>water<\/em><em>;<\/em> Jesus baptizes with <em>the Spirit<\/em> (1:33).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:5<\/strong> John the Baptist baptized with <em>water<\/em><em>;<\/em> Jesus baptizes with <em>the Spirit<\/em> (1:33).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:5 John the Baptist baptized with water; Jesus baptizes with the Spirit (1:33).","summary_en":"3:5 John the Baptist baptized with water; Jesus baptizes with the Spirit (1:33).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64475,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Promise of New Life","title_en":"The Promise of New Life","content_ro":"<h3>The Promise of New Life<\/h3>\n<p>The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can human bones return to life?” Ezekiel and his audience were already familiar with the possibility of dead people being raised to life because of their knowledge of the miracles of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21). Instead, Ezekiel is addressing the particular question, “Can <em>these<\/em> bones live?” That is, could the nation of Judah—a denuded, dismembered, and desiccated nation—be restored?<\/p>\n<p>At that time, the Babylonians had devastated Judah, the Temple had been destroyed, and many of the people had been exiled to Babylon. The people still in Judah were a mere remnant, only the poorest of the poor (see 2 Kgs 25:8-12). Many concluded that there was no future for God’s people. They said, “We have become old, dry bones—all hope is gone. Our nation is finished” (Ezek 37:11). The question was not whether God <em>could<\/em> raise them to new life, but whether he <em>would<\/em> perform such a miracle for the dry bones that represented Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet answered this question with a resounding <em>Yes!<\/em> God would return his people to life through an outpouring of his Spirit in response to the prophet’s word. Their death because of their sins was real, but God would not leave them in the grave (cp. Ps 16:10). Rather, he promised that in the future he would give his people life by his Spirit and would transform them into a new creation, a new Spirit-filled Israel. This new people of God would be raised to their feet as a mighty army that would serve the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God is capable of raising to life both those who are physically dead and those who are spiritually dead. He chooses to give the miracle of new birth to undeserving sinners (see John 3:5-7; Eph 2:1-7). Those who experience the death of sin in their lives also experience the new life that God offers through his Spirit—both now and in eternity (see Rom 8:5-13; Col 3:1-11). He makes people whom the world would write off as irredeemable acceptable to himself in Christ (1 Cor 6:9-11), and he equips them for fruitful work in his service (Eph 4:12-13; 6:11-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21; Ps 16:10; Ezek 18:31; 37:1-28; 39:29; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:11; 2 Cor 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Promise of New Life<\/h3>\n<p>The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can human bones return to life?” Ezekiel and his audience were already familiar with the possibility of dead people being raised to life because of their knowledge of the miracles of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21). Instead, Ezekiel is addressing the particular question, “Can <em>these<\/em> bones live?” That is, could the nation of Judah—a denuded, dismembered, and desiccated nation—be restored?<\/p>\n<p>At that time, the Babylonians had devastated Judah, the Temple had been destroyed, and many of the people had been exiled to Babylon. The people still in Judah were a mere remnant, only the poorest of the poor (see 2 Kgs 25:8-12). Many concluded that there was no future for God’s people. They said, “We have become old, dry bones—all hope is gone. Our nation is finished” (Ezek 37:11). The question was not whether God <em>could<\/em> raise them to new life, but whether he <em>would<\/em> perform such a miracle for the dry bones that represented Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet answered this question with a resounding <em>Yes!<\/em> God would return his people to life through an outpouring of his Spirit in response to the prophet’s word. Their death because of their sins was real, but God would not leave them in the grave (cp. Ps 16:10). Rather, he promised that in the future he would give his people life by his Spirit and would transform them into a new creation, a new Spirit-filled Israel. This new people of God would be raised to their feet as a mighty army that would serve the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God is capable of raising to life both those who are physically dead and those who are spiritually dead. He chooses to give the miracle of new birth to undeserving sinners (see John 3:5-7; Eph 2:1-7). Those who experience the death of sin in their lives also experience the new life that God offers through his Spirit—both now and in eternity (see Rom 8:5-13; Col 3:1-11). He makes people whom the world would write off as irredeemable acceptable to himself in Christ (1 Cor 6:9-11), and he equips them for fruitful work in his service (Eph 4:12-13; 6:11-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21; Ps 16:10; Ezek 18:31; 37:1-28; 39:29; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:11; 2 Cor 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Promise of New Life The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us. Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can h...","summary_en":"The Promise of New Life The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us. Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92101,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Promise of New Life","title_en":"The Promise of New Life","content_ro":"<h3>The Promise of New Life<\/h3>\n<p>The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can human bones return to life?” Ezekiel and his audience were already familiar with the possibility of dead people being raised to life because of their knowledge of the miracles of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21). Instead, Ezekiel is addressing the particular question, “Can <em>these<\/em> bones live?” That is, could the nation of Judah—a denuded, dismembered, and desiccated nation—be restored?<\/p>\n<p>At that time, the Babylonians had devastated Judah, the Temple had been destroyed, and many of the people had been exiled to Babylon. The people still in Judah were a mere remnant, only the poorest of the poor (see 2 Kgs 25:8-12). Many concluded that there was no future for God’s people. They said, “We have become old, dry bones—all hope is gone. Our nation is finished” (Ezek 37:11). The question was not whether God <em>could<\/em> raise them to new life, but whether he <em>would<\/em> perform such a miracle for the dry bones that represented Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet answered this question with a resounding <em>Yes!<\/em> God would return his people to life through an outpouring of his Spirit in response to the prophet’s word. Their death because of their sins was real, but God would not leave them in the grave (cp. Ps 16:10). Rather, he promised that in the future he would give his people life by his Spirit and would transform them into a new creation, a new Spirit-filled Israel. This new people of God would be raised to their feet as a mighty army that would serve the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God is capable of raising to life both those who are physically dead and those who are spiritually dead. He chooses to give the miracle of new birth to undeserving sinners (see John 3:5-7; Eph 2:1-7). Those who experience the death of sin in their lives also experience the new life that God offers through his Spirit—both now and in eternity (see Rom 8:5-13; Col 3:1-11). He makes people whom the world would write off as irredeemable acceptable to himself in Christ (1 Cor 6:9-11), and he equips them for fruitful work in his service (Eph 4:12-13; 6:11-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21; Ps 16:10; Ezek 18:31; 37:1-28; 39:29; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:11; 2 Cor 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Promise of New Life<\/h3>\n<p>The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can human bones return to life?” Ezekiel and his audience were already familiar with the possibility of dead people being raised to life because of their knowledge of the miracles of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21). Instead, Ezekiel is addressing the particular question, “Can <em>these<\/em> bones live?” That is, could the nation of Judah—a denuded, dismembered, and desiccated nation—be restored?<\/p>\n<p>At that time, the Babylonians had devastated Judah, the Temple had been destroyed, and many of the people had been exiled to Babylon. The people still in Judah were a mere remnant, only the poorest of the poor (see 2 Kgs 25:8-12). Many concluded that there was no future for God’s people. They said, “We have become old, dry bones—all hope is gone. Our nation is finished” (Ezek 37:11). The question was not whether God <em>could<\/em> raise them to new life, but whether he <em>would<\/em> perform such a miracle for the dry bones that represented Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet answered this question with a resounding <em>Yes!<\/em> God would return his people to life through an outpouring of his Spirit in response to the prophet’s word. Their death because of their sins was real, but God would not leave them in the grave (cp. Ps 16:10). Rather, he promised that in the future he would give his people life by his Spirit and would transform them into a new creation, a new Spirit-filled Israel. This new people of God would be raised to their feet as a mighty army that would serve the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God is capable of raising to life both those who are physically dead and those who are spiritually dead. He chooses to give the miracle of new birth to undeserving sinners (see John 3:5-7; Eph 2:1-7). Those who experience the death of sin in their lives also experience the new life that God offers through his Spirit—both now and in eternity (see Rom 8:5-13; Col 3:1-11). He makes people whom the world would write off as irredeemable acceptable to himself in Christ (1 Cor 6:9-11), and he equips them for fruitful work in his service (Eph 4:12-13; 6:11-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21; Ps 16:10; Ezek 18:31; 37:1-28; 39:29; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:11; 2 Cor 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Promise of New Life The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us. Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can h...","summary_en":"The Promise of New Life The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us. Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119727,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Promise of New Life","title_en":"The Promise of New Life","content_ro":"<h3>The Promise of New Life<\/h3>\n<p>The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can human bones return to life?” Ezekiel and his audience were already familiar with the possibility of dead people being raised to life because of their knowledge of the miracles of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21). Instead, Ezekiel is addressing the particular question, “Can <em>these<\/em> bones live?” That is, could the nation of Judah—a denuded, dismembered, and desiccated nation—be restored?<\/p>\n<p>At that time, the Babylonians had devastated Judah, the Temple had been destroyed, and many of the people had been exiled to Babylon. The people still in Judah were a mere remnant, only the poorest of the poor (see 2 Kgs 25:8-12). Many concluded that there was no future for God’s people. They said, “We have become old, dry bones—all hope is gone. Our nation is finished” (Ezek 37:11). The question was not whether God <em>could<\/em> raise them to new life, but whether he <em>would<\/em> perform such a miracle for the dry bones that represented Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet answered this question with a resounding <em>Yes!<\/em> God would return his people to life through an outpouring of his Spirit in response to the prophet’s word. Their death because of their sins was real, but God would not leave them in the grave (cp. Ps 16:10). Rather, he promised that in the future he would give his people life by his Spirit and would transform them into a new creation, a new Spirit-filled Israel. This new people of God would be raised to their feet as a mighty army that would serve the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God is capable of raising to life both those who are physically dead and those who are spiritually dead. He chooses to give the miracle of new birth to undeserving sinners (see John 3:5-7; Eph 2:1-7). Those who experience the death of sin in their lives also experience the new life that God offers through his Spirit—both now and in eternity (see Rom 8:5-13; Col 3:1-11). He makes people whom the world would write off as irredeemable acceptable to himself in Christ (1 Cor 6:9-11), and he equips them for fruitful work in his service (Eph 4:12-13; 6:11-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21; Ps 16:10; Ezek 18:31; 37:1-28; 39:29; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:11; 2 Cor 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Promise of New Life<\/h3>\n<p>The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can human bones return to life?” Ezekiel and his audience were already familiar with the possibility of dead people being raised to life because of their knowledge of the miracles of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21). Instead, Ezekiel is addressing the particular question, “Can <em>these<\/em> bones live?” That is, could the nation of Judah—a denuded, dismembered, and desiccated nation—be restored?<\/p>\n<p>At that time, the Babylonians had devastated Judah, the Temple had been destroyed, and many of the people had been exiled to Babylon. The people still in Judah were a mere remnant, only the poorest of the poor (see 2 Kgs 25:8-12). Many concluded that there was no future for God’s people. They said, “We have become old, dry bones—all hope is gone. Our nation is finished” (Ezek 37:11). The question was not whether God <em>could<\/em> raise them to new life, but whether he <em>would<\/em> perform such a miracle for the dry bones that represented Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet answered this question with a resounding <em>Yes!<\/em> God would return his people to life through an outpouring of his Spirit in response to the prophet’s word. Their death because of their sins was real, but God would not leave them in the grave (cp. Ps 16:10). Rather, he promised that in the future he would give his people life by his Spirit and would transform them into a new creation, a new Spirit-filled Israel. This new people of God would be raised to their feet as a mighty army that would serve the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God is capable of raising to life both those who are physically dead and those who are spiritually dead. He chooses to give the miracle of new birth to undeserving sinners (see John 3:5-7; Eph 2:1-7). Those who experience the death of sin in their lives also experience the new life that God offers through his Spirit—both now and in eternity (see Rom 8:5-13; Col 3:1-11). He makes people whom the world would write off as irredeemable acceptable to himself in Christ (1 Cor 6:9-11), and he equips them for fruitful work in his service (Eph 4:12-13; 6:11-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21; Ps 16:10; Ezek 18:31; 37:1-28; 39:29; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:11; 2 Cor 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Promise of New Life The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us. Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can h...","summary_en":"The Promise of New Life The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us. Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147353,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Promise of New Life","title_en":"The Promise of New Life","content_ro":"<h3>The Promise of New Life<\/h3>\n<p>The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can human bones return to life?” Ezekiel and his audience were already familiar with the possibility of dead people being raised to life because of their knowledge of the miracles of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21). Instead, Ezekiel is addressing the particular question, “Can <em>these<\/em> bones live?” That is, could the nation of Judah—a denuded, dismembered, and desiccated nation—be restored?<\/p>\n<p>At that time, the Babylonians had devastated Judah, the Temple had been destroyed, and many of the people had been exiled to Babylon. The people still in Judah were a mere remnant, only the poorest of the poor (see 2 Kgs 25:8-12). Many concluded that there was no future for God’s people. They said, “We have become old, dry bones—all hope is gone. Our nation is finished” (Ezek 37:11). The question was not whether God <em>could<\/em> raise them to new life, but whether he <em>would<\/em> perform such a miracle for the dry bones that represented Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet answered this question with a resounding <em>Yes!<\/em> God would return his people to life through an outpouring of his Spirit in response to the prophet’s word. Their death because of their sins was real, but God would not leave them in the grave (cp. Ps 16:10). Rather, he promised that in the future he would give his people life by his Spirit and would transform them into a new creation, a new Spirit-filled Israel. This new people of God would be raised to their feet as a mighty army that would serve the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God is capable of raising to life both those who are physically dead and those who are spiritually dead. He chooses to give the miracle of new birth to undeserving sinners (see John 3:5-7; Eph 2:1-7). Those who experience the death of sin in their lives also experience the new life that God offers through his Spirit—both now and in eternity (see Rom 8:5-13; Col 3:1-11). He makes people whom the world would write off as irredeemable acceptable to himself in Christ (1 Cor 6:9-11), and he equips them for fruitful work in his service (Eph 4:12-13; 6:11-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21; Ps 16:10; Ezek 18:31; 37:1-28; 39:29; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:11; 2 Cor 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Promise of New Life<\/h3>\n<p>The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can human bones return to life?” Ezekiel and his audience were already familiar with the possibility of dead people being raised to life because of their knowledge of the miracles of Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21). Instead, Ezekiel is addressing the particular question, “Can <em>these<\/em> bones live?” That is, could the nation of Judah—a denuded, dismembered, and desiccated nation—be restored?<\/p>\n<p>At that time, the Babylonians had devastated Judah, the Temple had been destroyed, and many of the people had been exiled to Babylon. The people still in Judah were a mere remnant, only the poorest of the poor (see 2 Kgs 25:8-12). Many concluded that there was no future for God’s people. They said, “We have become old, dry bones—all hope is gone. Our nation is finished” (Ezek 37:11). The question was not whether God <em>could<\/em> raise them to new life, but whether he <em>would<\/em> perform such a miracle for the dry bones that represented Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet answered this question with a resounding <em>Yes!<\/em> God would return his people to life through an outpouring of his Spirit in response to the prophet’s word. Their death because of their sins was real, but God would not leave them in the grave (cp. Ps 16:10). Rather, he promised that in the future he would give his people life by his Spirit and would transform them into a new creation, a new Spirit-filled Israel. This new people of God would be raised to their feet as a mighty army that would serve the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God is capable of raising to life both those who are physically dead and those who are spiritually dead. He chooses to give the miracle of new birth to undeserving sinners (see John 3:5-7; Eph 2:1-7). Those who experience the death of sin in their lives also experience the new life that God offers through his Spirit—both now and in eternity (see Rom 8:5-13; Col 3:1-11). He makes people whom the world would write off as irredeemable acceptable to himself in Christ (1 Cor 6:9-11), and he equips them for fruitful work in his service (Eph 4:12-13; 6:11-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:31-37; 13:20-21; Ps 16:10; Ezek 18:31; 37:1-28; 39:29; Matt 22:31-32; Rom 8:11; 2 Cor 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Promise of New Life The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us. Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can h...","summary_en":"The Promise of New Life The Resurrection is a core tenet of Christian faith—without it, our faith is useless (1 Cor 15:14). God has promised that we share this resurrection with Christ (Col 3:1), and it is important to rightly understand exactly what new life God promises to us. Ezekiel 37 might at first appear to teach that all people will be resurrected from the dead, living again in new bodies after their present bodies die. However, Ezekiel is not dealing with the general question, “Can h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":24196,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Old and New Man","title_en":"Old and New Man","content_ro":"<h3>MAN, Old and New<\/h3>\n<p>Biblical terms used to describe the state of man in relation to Christ. Human beings are created in the image of God and are made to have fellowship with him (Gn 1:26-27). God made known to Adam and Eve his will in a specific situation (2:15-17), yet they used the freedom of their will to disobey God’s command (3:1-7). So the human race is dead in sin (Rom 5:12-21; Eph 2:1-3). The sin of Adam and Eve has been passed on to all humanity (original sin). Born with the tendency toward sin (Ps 51:5), as soon as the age of moral responsibility is reached, individuals begin to commit their own sins. Paul uses the term “old man” to refer to this condition. The old man can keep certain parts of the law and do various good things. But no old man can ever do enough good things to earn his own salvation. The old man must be made into a new man or he will suffer the consequences of his sin. Only God can bring about that radical change. Human beings can only accept by faith God’s gracious gift.<\/p>\n<p>David, in Psalm 51, cries out for God to take away the guilt of his sins. In verse 10 he pleads, “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and put a new and right spirit within me” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God promises in Ezekiel 11:19, 18:31, and 36:26 to give repentant sinners a new heart and a new spirit. In Romans 6:5-11 Paul shows how the old nature has been crucified with Christ, so he can conclude, “So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus” (6:11). In Ephesians 4:22-24 and Colossians 3:9-10 he shows the believer that he has put off the old man and put on the new man. Jesus speaks of this radical transformation as being born anew—not a second physical birth, as Nicodemus thought, but a spiritual birth (Jn 3:6). Only the grace of God can change the old man into the new man. The old man accepts God’s gracious gift by faith, but even that faith is a gift of God (Eph 2:8). The new man becomes a child of God. He does not immediately become perfect. He must fight against sin throughout this life as he strives to come closer and closer to the ideal of perfect holiness. He will attain that perfection only in the resurrection to come (1 Cor 15:42-45), when all things are made new (Rv 21:5).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adam (Person); Man; Man, Natural; Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MAN, Old and New<\/h3>\n<p>Biblical terms used to describe the state of man in relation to Christ. Human beings are created in the image of God and are made to have fellowship with him (Gn 1:26-27). God made known to Adam and Eve his will in a specific situation (2:15-17), yet they used the freedom of their will to disobey God’s command (3:1-7). So the human race is dead in sin (Rom 5:12-21; Eph 2:1-3). The sin of Adam and Eve has been passed on to all humanity (original sin). Born with the tendency toward sin (Ps 51:5), as soon as the age of moral responsibility is reached, individuals begin to commit their own sins. Paul uses the term “old man” to refer to this condition. The old man can keep certain parts of the law and do various good things. But no old man can ever do enough good things to earn his own salvation. The old man must be made into a new man or he will suffer the consequences of his sin. Only God can bring about that radical change. Human beings can only accept by faith God’s gracious gift.<\/p>\n<p>David, in Psalm 51, cries out for God to take away the guilt of his sins. In verse 10 he pleads, “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and put a new and right spirit within me” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God promises in Ezekiel 11:19, 18:31, and 36:26 to give repentant sinners a new heart and a new spirit. In Romans 6:5-11 Paul shows how the old nature has been crucified with Christ, so he can conclude, “So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus” (6:11). In Ephesians 4:22-24 and Colossians 3:9-10 he shows the believer that he has put off the old man and put on the new man. Jesus speaks of this radical transformation as being born anew—not a second physical birth, as Nicodemus thought, but a spiritual birth (Jn 3:6). Only the grace of God can change the old man into the new man. The old man accepts God’s gracious gift by faith, but even that faith is a gift of God (Eph 2:8). The new man becomes a child of God. He does not immediately become perfect. He must fight against sin throughout this life as he strives to come closer and closer to the ideal of perfect holiness. He will attain that perfection only in the resurrection to come (1 Cor 15:42-45), when all things are made new (Rv 21:5).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adam (Person); Man; Man, Natural; Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MAN, Old and New Biblical terms used to describe the state of man in relation to Christ. Human beings are created in the image of God and are made to have fellowship with him (Gn 1:26-27). God made known to Adam and Eve his will in a specific situation (2:15-17), yet they used the freedom of their will to disobey God’s command (3:1-7). So the human race is dead in sin (Rom 5:12-21; Eph 2:1-3). The sin of Adam and Eve has been passed on to all humanity (original sin). Born with the tendency to...","summary_en":"MAN, Old and New Biblical terms used to describe the state of man in relation to Christ. Human beings are created in the image of God and are made to have fellowship with him (Gn 1:26-27). God made known to Adam and Eve his will in a specific situation (2:15-17), yet they used the freedom of their will to disobey God’s command (3:1-7). So the human race is dead in sin (Rom 5:12-21; Eph 2:1-3). The sin of Adam and Eve has been passed on to all humanity (original sin). Born with the tendency to...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36245,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Man*, Spirit","title_en":"of Man*, Spirit","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF MAN*<\/h3>\n<p>The innermost being of the human person, corresponding with the nature of God, which is Spirit. Some scholars think the spirit is the same as the soul; others see a distinction. As such, some believe in the tripartite (threefold) nature of a human (cf. 1 Thes 5:23), spirit, soul, and body, as against a bipartite (twofold) nature, material and immaterial.<\/p>\n<p>First Thessalonians 5:23 clearly speaks of a tripartite design for mankind. Other Scriptures see soul and spirit as the same. A clear case of the parallel (synonymous) use of soul and spirit (as in Jb 7:11; Is 26:9, etc.) is in Mary’s “Magnificat.” She says, “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior” (Lk 1:47, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Rather than divide the two as “parts,” some have suggested that a human <em>has<\/em> a spirit and <em>is<\/em> a soul. Usually spirit indicates the vitalizing, energizing, empowering agent; it is that essence of the human being that corresponds with God’s nature and can commune with God, who is Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are united to Christ experience spiritual union with him—his Spirit with their spirit. This is what Paul meant when he said, “He who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit” (1 Cor 6:17). Note that Paul does not say, “he who joins himself to the Spirit is one spirit”; he uses the word “Lord” as synonymous with “the Spirit.” Union with the Lord is a union of the human spirit with his Spirit. Since the day of regeneration, a believer’s human spirit is united to Christ’s Spirit. Look at John 3:6 (“that which is born of the Spirit is spirit”) and Romans 8:16 (“his Spirit bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God”). These scriptures show that one’s union with Christ is based upon the regeneration of one’s spirit by the divine Spirit.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF MAN*<\/h3>\n<p>The innermost being of the human person, corresponding with the nature of God, which is Spirit. Some scholars think the spirit is the same as the soul; others see a distinction. As such, some believe in the tripartite (threefold) nature of a human (cf. 1 Thes 5:23), spirit, soul, and body, as against a bipartite (twofold) nature, material and immaterial.<\/p>\n<p>First Thessalonians 5:23 clearly speaks of a tripartite design for mankind. Other Scriptures see soul and spirit as the same. A clear case of the parallel (synonymous) use of soul and spirit (as in Jb 7:11; Is 26:9, etc.) is in Mary’s “Magnificat.” She says, “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior” (Lk 1:47, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Rather than divide the two as “parts,” some have suggested that a human <em>has<\/em> a spirit and <em>is<\/em> a soul. Usually spirit indicates the vitalizing, energizing, empowering agent; it is that essence of the human being that corresponds with God’s nature and can commune with God, who is Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are united to Christ experience spiritual union with him—his Spirit with their spirit. This is what Paul meant when he said, “He who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit” (1 Cor 6:17). Note that Paul does not say, “he who joins himself to the Spirit is one spirit”; he uses the word “Lord” as synonymous with “the Spirit.” Union with the Lord is a union of the human spirit with his Spirit. Since the day of regeneration, a believer’s human spirit is united to Christ’s Spirit. Look at John 3:6 (“that which is born of the Spirit is spirit”) and Romans 8:16 (“his Spirit bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God”). These scriptures show that one’s union with Christ is based upon the regeneration of one’s spirit by the divine Spirit.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF MAN* The innermost being of the human person, corresponding with the nature of God, which is Spirit. Some scholars think the spirit is the same as the soul; others see a distinction. As such, some believe in the tripartite (threefold) nature of a human (cf. 1 Thes 5:23), spirit, soul, and body, as against a bipartite (twofold) nature, material and immaterial. First Thessalonians 5:23 clearly speaks of a tripartite design for mankind. Other Scriptures see soul and spirit as the same....","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF MAN* The innermost being of the human person, corresponding with the nature of God, which is Spirit. Some scholars think the spirit is the same as the soul; others see a distinction. As such, some believe in the tripartite (threefold) nature of a human (cf. 1 Thes 5:23), spirit, soul, and body, as against a bipartite (twofold) nature, material and immaterial. First Thessalonians 5:23 clearly speaks of a tripartite design for mankind. Other Scriptures see soul and spirit as the same....","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40445,"type":"picture","type_label":"Imagine","type_icon":"🖼️","type_color":"#ec4899","title_ro":"The Divine Spirit and Human Spirit in Special Written Form","title_en":"The Divine Spirit and Human Spirit in Special Written Form","content_ro":"<p><\/p>\n <p><strong>The Divine Spirit and Human Spirit in Special Written Form<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In John 3:6 (last line), the scribe of Bodmer Papyrus II (P66) wrote the word <span>ΠΝΑ<\/span> to signal the divine Spirit, and then wrote out the word ΠΝΕΜΑ to signal the human spirit.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><\/p>\n <p><strong>The Divine Spirit and Human Spirit in Special Written Form<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In John 3:6 (last line), the scribe of Bodmer Papyrus II (P66) wrote the word <span>ΠΝΑ<\/span> to signal the divine Spirit, and then wrote out the word ΠΝΕΜΑ to signal the human spirit.<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Divine Spirit and Human Spirit in Special Written Form In John 3:6 (last line), the scribe of Bodmer Papyrus II (P66) wrote the word ΠΝΑ to signal the divine Spirit, and then wrote out the word ΠΝΕΜΑ to signal the human spirit.","summary_en":"The Divine Spirit and Human Spirit in Special Written Form In John 3:6 (last line), the scribe of Bodmer Papyrus II (P66) wrote the word ΠΝΑ to signal the divine Spirit, and then wrote out the word ΠΝΕΜΑ to signal the human spirit.","source":"Pictures\/Pictures.xml","external_url":"..\/Pictures\/artfiles\/spirit.jpg","has_map":false,"has_picture":true}],"7":[{"id":40416,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"You Must Be Born Again","title_en":"Must Be Born Again, You","content_ro":"<h3>You Must Be Born Again<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>The Bible insists that regeneration is absolutely necessary. Apart from it, all persons are dead in trespasses and sin (Eph 2:1). A shocking description of this condition is given in Ephesians 2:2-3. An unregenerated person is unable to understand the things of God, and no amount of good works can change it (1 Cor 2:14; Ti 3:5). This is why Jesus insisted, in his dialogue with Nicodemus, “You must be born again” (Jn 3:7).<\/p><\/blockquote>","content_en":"<h3>You Must Be Born Again<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>The Bible insists that regeneration is absolutely necessary. Apart from it, all persons are dead in trespasses and sin (Eph 2:1). A shocking description of this condition is given in Ephesians 2:2-3. An unregenerated person is unable to understand the things of God, and no amount of good works can change it (1 Cor 2:14; Ti 3:5). This is why Jesus insisted, in his dialogue with Nicodemus, “You must be born again” (Jn 3:7).<\/p><\/blockquote>","summary_ro":"You Must Be Born Again The Bible insists that regeneration is absolutely necessary. Apart from it, all persons are dead in trespasses and sin (Eph 2:1). A shocking description of this condition is given in Ephesians 2:2-3. An unregenerated person is unable to understand the things of God, and no amount of good works can change it (1 Cor 2:14; Ti 3:5). This is why Jesus insisted, in his dialogue with Nicodemus, “You must be born again” (Jn 3:7).","summary_en":"You Must Be Born Again The Bible insists that regeneration is absolutely necessary. Apart from it, all persons are dead in trespasses and sin (Eph 2:1). A shocking description of this condition is given in Ephesians 2:2-3. An unregenerated person is unable to understand the things of God, and no amount of good works can change it (1 Cor 2:14; Ti 3:5). This is why Jesus insisted, in his dialogue with Nicodemus, “You must be born again” (Jn 3:7).","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":11739,"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":36083,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Spirit of God","title_en":"Spirit of God","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56356,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:8<\/strong> <em>Wind<\/em> translates the same word in Greek as <em>spirit<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>). The wind is an apt image for <em>the Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:8<\/strong> <em>Wind<\/em> translates the same word in Greek as <em>spirit<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>). The wind is an apt image for <em>the Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:8 Wind translates the same word in Greek as spirit (Greek pneuma). The wind is an apt image for the Spirit, who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.","summary_en":"3:8 Wind translates the same word in Greek as spirit (Greek pneuma). The wind is an apt image for the Spirit, who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83982,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:8<\/strong> <em>Wind<\/em> translates the same word in Greek as <em>spirit<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>). The wind is an apt image for <em>the Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:8<\/strong> <em>Wind<\/em> translates the same word in Greek as <em>spirit<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>). The wind is an apt image for <em>the Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:8 Wind translates the same word in Greek as spirit (Greek pneuma). The wind is an apt image for the Spirit, who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.","summary_en":"3:8 Wind translates the same word in Greek as spirit (Greek pneuma). The wind is an apt image for the Spirit, who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111608,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:8<\/strong> <em>Wind<\/em> translates the same word in Greek as <em>spirit<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>). The wind is an apt image for <em>the Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:8<\/strong> <em>Wind<\/em> translates the same word in Greek as <em>spirit<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>). The wind is an apt image for <em>the Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:8 Wind translates the same word in Greek as spirit (Greek pneuma). The wind is an apt image for the Spirit, who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.","summary_en":"3:8 Wind translates the same word in Greek as spirit (Greek pneuma). The wind is an apt image for the Spirit, who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139234,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:8<\/strong> <em>Wind<\/em> translates the same word in Greek as <em>spirit<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>). The wind is an apt image for <em>the Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:8<\/strong> <em>Wind<\/em> translates the same word in Greek as <em>spirit<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>). The wind is an apt image for <em>the Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:8 Wind translates the same word in Greek as spirit (Greek pneuma). The wind is an apt image for the Spirit, who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.","summary_en":"3:8 Wind translates the same word in Greek as spirit (Greek pneuma). The wind is an apt image for the Spirit, who is sent from heaven and cannot be contained or controlled.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":65879,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93505,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121131,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148757,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":11358,"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":15804,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Heaven","title_en":"Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","summary_en":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35797,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of God","title_en":"Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asclepius”; and eventually by ascribing to anyone with mysterious powers or qualities the title or reputation of “divine man.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTermintheOldTestament\">The Term in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, certain men who lived before the time of Noah (Gn 6:1-4), “the angels” (including Satan, Jb 1:6; 2:1), and other heavenly beings (Pss 29:1; 82:6; 89:6, <span>rsv<\/span> mg) are called “sons of God.” Israel as a people was the chosen son of God. This corporate sonship became the basis of Israel’s redemption from Egypt: “Israel is my first-born son” (Ex 4:22; cf. Jer 31:9). Corporate sonship was the context for focus on personal sonship in the divine sanction of David as king: “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sm 7:14). David’s “adoptive” sonship was by divine decree: “I will proclaim the decree: . . . ‘You are my son; today I have become your Father’ ” (Ps 2:7); and it was the prophetic prototype of the “essential” sonship of Jesus, David’s royal son (Mt 3:17; Mk 1:11; Lk 3:22; Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5; 5:5). Other messianic prophecies ascribe divine names to the Davidic Messiah: “Immanuel” (Is 7:13-14) and “Mighty God, Everlasting Father” (Is 9:6-7). These are fulfilled in Jesus (Mt 1:23; 21:4-10; 22:41-45).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheGospels\">In the Gospels<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is revealed in the Gospels in three distinct ways.<\/p>\n<p>The first is his <em>eternal, personal sonship.<\/em> Jesus’ personal sonship is revealed in Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16) and in Jesus’ identification of himself at his trial: “ ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?’ . . . ‘I am,’ said Jesus” (Mk 14:61-62). In both instances, the issue is his personal being or essence, his eternal identity.<\/p>\n<p>Long before Creation, even from eternity, the Father and the Son enjoyed fellowship with each other. We know this because the Bible tells us so—but not in any great detail. For the most part, the Scriptures are silent about the premundane scene. And yet there are a few verses that lift the veil slightly and give us a glimpse into that sublime, divine relationship that always existed between the Father and the Son.<\/p>\n<p>Of all the books in the Bible, the Gospel of John has the most to say about the relationship between the Father and the Son. It is from John’s inspired pen that we read from the outset, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This is a rather flat rendering. The Greek conveys something more picturesque: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was face to face with God, and the Word was himself God.” Imagine, the Word, who was the preincarnate Son of God, was face to face with God. The expression “face to face” translates the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pros<\/span> (short for <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">prosopon pros prosopon<\/span><em>,<\/em> “face to face,” a common expression in koine Greek.) The expression signifies intimate fellowship. The Father and Son enjoyed such an intimate fellowship from eternity. How they must have delighted in each other!<\/p>\n<p>After the Son of God became a man and began his ministry on earth, he referred to the relationship he enjoyed with the Father before the foundation of the world. Jesus spoke of what he had seen and heard together with the Father before coming to earth (see John 3:13 and 8:38). Jesus longed to return to that glorious sphere. In his prayer before going to the cross (in ch 17), he asked the Father to glorify him with the glory he had with the Father before the world was (v 5). Jesus wanted to recapture his primordial equality with the Father—something he had willingly relinquished for the sake of his Father’s plan (see Phil 2:6-7). As he prayed to the Father, a wonderful utterance escaped from his lips: “Father, . . . you loved me before the foundation of the world” (Jn 17:24). God’s Son, the unique Son, was the single object of the Father’s love.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ sonship is his <em>nativity sonship.<\/em> The nativity of Jesus is traced to the direct, spiritual paternity of God. Jesus is the Son of God because his incarnation and birth into the human race was created by the Holy Spirit. In Matthew, Jesus’ conception “is of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 1:20). He is to be named “Jesus” (meaning Yahweh is salvation) “because he will save his people from their sins” (v 21), and “Immanuel” (God with us) because he is himself the Son of God in human flesh (v 23). In Luke, Jesus’ conception was by the Holy Spirit and the power of the Most High (Lk 1:31, 35), so Jesus was called “the Son of God” (v 35). If the father of Jesus had been the man Joseph, he would have been called “Jesus, the son of Joseph.” Luke’s teaching clearly means that since the Spirit of God was the father of Jesus, this son of the virgin Mary is properly called “Jesus, the Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>The third aspect is his <em>messianic sonship.<\/em> Jesus is the Father’s Son and representative, whose earthly mission is to establish the kingdom of God. At his baptism, he began his mission with the Father’s coronation: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Mt 3:17; cf. Ps 2:7). Jesus received a similar pronouncement from heaven at his Transfiguration (Lk 9:35). As the messianic Son, Jesus perfectly completed the redeeming work given him to do by his Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestamentEpistles\">In the New Testament Epistles<\/p>\n<p>Paul spoke of the essential, ontological sonship of Jesus—not as an isolated fact, but in the context of his redemptive work. It was as God’s Son that Jesus took human nature (Rom 1:3) and as “the Son of God” that he was resurrected and enthroned in power (Mt 28:18; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:28). The Incarnation is spoken of as “God sending his own Son” (Rom 8:3; Gal 4:4) for humanity’s redemption, a redemption that was accomplished “through the death of his Son” (Rom 5:10; 8:29, 32). As a consequence, believers can have “fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor 1:9), and they can live by faith in “the Son of God” (Gal 2:20). Paul’s first preaching was “that Jesus is the Son of God” (Acts 9:20); this was later expounded by Paul in the light of Psalm 2:7 (see Acts 13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrews, Jesus is “the Son,” who is God’s “firstborn” and personal “heir,” who is creator and sustainer of the universe, and who is the “radiance of God’s glory” (Heb 1:2-12; 3:6; 5:5). As the Son, he is the final and eternal High Priest who ascended to heaven and whose mediatorial work remains perfect forever (4:14; 6:6; 7:3, 28). In 1 John 4 and 5, belief in Jesus as the incarnate Son of God is essential for salvation; disbelief comes from the spirit of the Antichrist.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asclepius”; and eventually by ascribing to anyone with mysterious powers or qualities the title or reputation of “divine man.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTermintheOldTestament\">The Term in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, certain men who lived before the time of Noah (Gn 6:1-4), “the angels” (including Satan, Jb 1:6; 2:1), and other heavenly beings (Pss 29:1; 82:6; 89:6, <span>rsv<\/span> mg) are called “sons of God.” Israel as a people was the chosen son of God. This corporate sonship became the basis of Israel’s redemption from Egypt: “Israel is my first-born son” (Ex 4:22; cf. Jer 31:9). Corporate sonship was the context for focus on personal sonship in the divine sanction of David as king: “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sm 7:14). David’s “adoptive” sonship was by divine decree: “I will proclaim the decree: . . . ‘You are my son; today I have become your Father’ ” (Ps 2:7); and it was the prophetic prototype of the “essential” sonship of Jesus, David’s royal son (Mt 3:17; Mk 1:11; Lk 3:22; Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5; 5:5). Other messianic prophecies ascribe divine names to the Davidic Messiah: “Immanuel” (Is 7:13-14) and “Mighty God, Everlasting Father” (Is 9:6-7). These are fulfilled in Jesus (Mt 1:23; 21:4-10; 22:41-45).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheGospels\">In the Gospels<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is revealed in the Gospels in three distinct ways.<\/p>\n<p>The first is his <em>eternal, personal sonship.<\/em> Jesus’ personal sonship is revealed in Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16) and in Jesus’ identification of himself at his trial: “ ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?’ . . . ‘I am,’ said Jesus” (Mk 14:61-62). In both instances, the issue is his personal being or essence, his eternal identity.<\/p>\n<p>Long before Creation, even from eternity, the Father and the Son enjoyed fellowship with each other. We know this because the Bible tells us so—but not in any great detail. For the most part, the Scriptures are silent about the premundane scene. And yet there are a few verses that lift the veil slightly and give us a glimpse into that sublime, divine relationship that always existed between the Father and the Son.<\/p>\n<p>Of all the books in the Bible, the Gospel of John has the most to say about the relationship between the Father and the Son. It is from John’s inspired pen that we read from the outset, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This is a rather flat rendering. The Greek conveys something more picturesque: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was face to face with God, and the Word was himself God.” Imagine, the Word, who was the preincarnate Son of God, was face to face with God. The expression “face to face” translates the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pros<\/span> (short for <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">prosopon pros prosopon<\/span><em>,<\/em> “face to face,” a common expression in koine Greek.) The expression signifies intimate fellowship. The Father and Son enjoyed such an intimate fellowship from eternity. How they must have delighted in each other!<\/p>\n<p>After the Son of God became a man and began his ministry on earth, he referred to the relationship he enjoyed with the Father before the foundation of the world. Jesus spoke of what he had seen and heard together with the Father before coming to earth (see John 3:13 and 8:38). Jesus longed to return to that glorious sphere. In his prayer before going to the cross (in ch 17), he asked the Father to glorify him with the glory he had with the Father before the world was (v 5). Jesus wanted to recapture his primordial equality with the Father—something he had willingly relinquished for the sake of his Father’s plan (see Phil 2:6-7). As he prayed to the Father, a wonderful utterance escaped from his lips: “Father, . . . you loved me before the foundation of the world” (Jn 17:24). God’s Son, the unique Son, was the single object of the Father’s love.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ sonship is his <em>nativity sonship.<\/em> The nativity of Jesus is traced to the direct, spiritual paternity of God. Jesus is the Son of God because his incarnation and birth into the human race was created by the Holy Spirit. In Matthew, Jesus’ conception “is of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 1:20). He is to be named “Jesus” (meaning Yahweh is salvation) “because he will save his people from their sins” (v 21), and “Immanuel” (God with us) because he is himself the Son of God in human flesh (v 23). In Luke, Jesus’ conception was by the Holy Spirit and the power of the Most High (Lk 1:31, 35), so Jesus was called “the Son of God” (v 35). If the father of Jesus had been the man Joseph, he would have been called “Jesus, the son of Joseph.” Luke’s teaching clearly means that since the Spirit of God was the father of Jesus, this son of the virgin Mary is properly called “Jesus, the Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>The third aspect is his <em>messianic sonship.<\/em> Jesus is the Father’s Son and representative, whose earthly mission is to establish the kingdom of God. At his baptism, he began his mission with the Father’s coronation: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Mt 3:17; cf. Ps 2:7). Jesus received a similar pronouncement from heaven at his Transfiguration (Lk 9:35). As the messianic Son, Jesus perfectly completed the redeeming work given him to do by his Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestamentEpistles\">In the New Testament Epistles<\/p>\n<p>Paul spoke of the essential, ontological sonship of Jesus—not as an isolated fact, but in the context of his redemptive work. It was as God’s Son that Jesus took human nature (Rom 1:3) and as “the Son of God” that he was resurrected and enthroned in power (Mt 28:18; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:28). The Incarnation is spoken of as “God sending his own Son” (Rom 8:3; Gal 4:4) for humanity’s redemption, a redemption that was accomplished “through the death of his Son” (Rom 5:10; 8:29, 32). As a consequence, believers can have “fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor 1:9), and they can live by faith in “the Son of God” (Gal 2:20). Paul’s first preaching was “that Jesus is the Son of God” (Acts 9:20); this was later expounded by Paul in the light of Psalm 2:7 (see Acts 13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrews, Jesus is “the Son,” who is God’s “firstborn” and personal “heir,” who is creator and sustainer of the universe, and who is the “radiance of God’s glory” (Heb 1:2-12; 3:6; 5:5). As the Son, he is the final and eternal High Priest who ascended to heaven and whose mediatorial work remains perfect forever (4:14; 6:6; 7:3, 28). In 1 John 4 and 5, belief in Jesus as the incarnate Son of God is essential for salvation; disbelief comes from the spirit of the Antichrist.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF GOD Term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son. Jesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asc...","summary_en":"SON OF GOD Term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son. Jesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asc...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35888,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56357,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:13<\/strong> There is great distance between this world and <em>heaven<\/em> (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:13<\/strong> There is great distance between this world and <em>heaven<\/em> (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:13 There is great distance between this world and heaven (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).","summary_en":"3:13 There is great distance between this world and heaven (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83983,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:13<\/strong> There is great distance between this world and <em>heaven<\/em> (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:13<\/strong> There is great distance between this world and <em>heaven<\/em> (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:13 There is great distance between this world and heaven (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).","summary_en":"3:13 There is great distance between this world and heaven (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111609,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:13<\/strong> There is great distance between this world and <em>heaven<\/em> (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:13<\/strong> There is great distance between this world and <em>heaven<\/em> (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:13 There is great distance between this world and heaven (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).","summary_en":"3:13 There is great distance between this world and heaven (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139235,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:13<\/strong> There is great distance between this world and <em>heaven<\/em> (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:13<\/strong> There is great distance between this world and <em>heaven<\/em> (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:13 There is great distance between this world and heaven (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).","summary_en":"3:13 There is great distance between this world and heaven (see 1:51; 3:31; 6:38, 42). Jesus bridged that distance, validating his divine status by defeating death and returning to heaven (16:5-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64984,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67123,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92610,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94749,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120236,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122375,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147862,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150001,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":5735,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bronze Snake Bronze Serpent","title_en":"Serpent, Bronze Snake, Bronze","content_ro":"<h3>BRONZE SERPENT, BRONZE SNAKE<\/h3>\n<p>Piece of sculpture that God commanded Moses to make when the Israelites were being bitten by “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:4-9). The serpents had been sent as a judgment because the people were grumbling against God and against Moses. When the people repented, God ordered the replica made; those who looked at it were healed.<\/p>\n<p>Some connect the theological meaning of the scene with an episode in which Moses’ rod became a serpent, swallowed up the serpent-rods of the Pharaoh’s magicians, and then became a rod again (Ex 7:8-12; cf. 4:2-5, 28-30). The serpent was a deified figure in both the Egyptian and Canaanite religions. Therefore, the triumph of God’s serpent figure typified the superiority of the Lord over the pagan gods. In Numbers 21, however, such a realization must have been secondary. That event was the last of a number of “apostasies” in the wilderness (cf. 1 Cor 10:9), all of which included four elements: complaints against God, judgment, repentance, and forgiveness or deliverance. The major theological theme is not the Lord’s superiority but his provision of salvation. The stress was not on a magical formula for healing, but rather on the serpent as a symbol of salvation offered to all who would focus on it.<\/p>\n<p>The bronze serpent appears again in 2 Kings 18:4. In the intervening centuries it had become an idolatrous object, and King Hezekiah (716–686 <span>BC<\/span>) of the southern kingdom of Judah abolished it in his reform movement. The final reference to it in pre-Christian literature is in the apocryphal book Wisdom of Solomon, which supports the above interpretation: salvation came not through the serpent but through God’s provision. “He who turned towards it was healed, not by what he saw, but by you, the Savior of all” (Wisd of Sol 16:7).<\/p>\n<p>Against this background, Christ said that he, like Moses’ serpent, must be lifted up (Jn 3:14). The “lifting up” of the “Son of Man” is a definite reference to Christ’s death and has two foci. One is a “death as salvation” theme, seen in the Mosaic serpent imagery and the divine imperative “must” (in Jn referring to the necessity of God’s ordained plan of salvation). The other is a “death as exaltation” theme, seen in the verb itself (containing the idea of majesty) and in John’s stress on the glory of Jesus’ earthly ministry and of his resurrected status.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BRONZE SERPENT, BRONZE SNAKE<\/h3>\n<p>Piece of sculpture that God commanded Moses to make when the Israelites were being bitten by “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:4-9). The serpents had been sent as a judgment because the people were grumbling against God and against Moses. When the people repented, God ordered the replica made; those who looked at it were healed.<\/p>\n<p>Some connect the theological meaning of the scene with an episode in which Moses’ rod became a serpent, swallowed up the serpent-rods of the Pharaoh’s magicians, and then became a rod again (Ex 7:8-12; cf. 4:2-5, 28-30). The serpent was a deified figure in both the Egyptian and Canaanite religions. Therefore, the triumph of God’s serpent figure typified the superiority of the Lord over the pagan gods. In Numbers 21, however, such a realization must have been secondary. That event was the last of a number of “apostasies” in the wilderness (cf. 1 Cor 10:9), all of which included four elements: complaints against God, judgment, repentance, and forgiveness or deliverance. The major theological theme is not the Lord’s superiority but his provision of salvation. The stress was not on a magical formula for healing, but rather on the serpent as a symbol of salvation offered to all who would focus on it.<\/p>\n<p>The bronze serpent appears again in 2 Kings 18:4. In the intervening centuries it had become an idolatrous object, and King Hezekiah (716–686 <span>BC<\/span>) of the southern kingdom of Judah abolished it in his reform movement. The final reference to it in pre-Christian literature is in the apocryphal book Wisdom of Solomon, which supports the above interpretation: salvation came not through the serpent but through God’s provision. “He who turned towards it was healed, not by what he saw, but by you, the Savior of all” (Wisd of Sol 16:7).<\/p>\n<p>Against this background, Christ said that he, like Moses’ serpent, must be lifted up (Jn 3:14). The “lifting up” of the “Son of Man” is a definite reference to Christ’s death and has two foci. One is a “death as salvation” theme, seen in the Mosaic serpent imagery and the divine imperative “must” (in Jn referring to the necessity of God’s ordained plan of salvation). The other is a “death as exaltation” theme, seen in the verb itself (containing the idea of majesty) and in John’s stress on the glory of Jesus’ earthly ministry and of his resurrected status.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BRONZE SERPENT, BRONZE SNAKE Piece of sculpture that God commanded Moses to make when the Israelites were being bitten by “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:4-9). The serpents had been sent as a judgment because the people were grumbling against God and against Moses. When the people repented, God ordered the replica made; those who looked at it were healed. Some connect the theological meaning of the scene with an episode in which Moses’ rod became a serpent, swallowed up the serpent-rods of the Pharao...","summary_en":"BRONZE SERPENT, BRONZE SNAKE Piece of sculpture that God commanded Moses to make when the Israelites were being bitten by “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:4-9). The serpents had been sent as a judgment because the people were grumbling against God and against Moses. When the people repented, God ordered the replica made; those who looked at it were healed. Some connect the theological meaning of the scene with an episode in which Moses’ rod became a serpent, swallowed up the serpent-rods of the Pharao...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8199,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Crucifixion","title_en":"Crucifixion","content_ro":"<h3>CRUCIFIXION<\/h3>\n<p>Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>• Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<h5>The Pagan Mode<\/h5>\n<p>Literally, the word “cross” in Greek referred to a pointed stake used for various purposes, including an instrument of execution. It could be an upright stake, used to impale a victim, or a vertical stake with a crossbeam either across the top (T) or across the middle (+), used to hang or crucify a criminal, with the added disgrace of public display. Evidently crucifixion was practiced first by the Medes and Persians and later by Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>), the Carthaginians, and the Romans. Both Greeks and Romans restricted its use to slaves, considering it too barbaric for citizens. In the imperial era the Romans extended the use to foreigners, but even so it was used mainly for crimes against the state.<\/p>\n<p>Crucifixion was universally recognized as the most horrible type of execution. In the East, in fact, it was used only as a further sign of disgrace for prisoners already executed, usually by decapitation. In the West the condemned criminal was scourged (whipped), usually at the place of execution, and forced to carry the crossbeam to the spot where a stake had already been erected. A tablet stating the crime was often placed around the offender’s neck and was fastened to the cross after the execution. The prisoner was commonly tied or sometimes nailed to the crossbeam (with the nails through the wrists, since the bones in the hand could not take the weight). The beam was then raised and fixed to the upright pole. If the executioners wished a particularly slow, agonizing death, they might drive blocks or pins into the stake for a seat or a step to support the feet. Death came about either through loss of blood circulation followed by coronary failure or through the collapse of one’s lungs, causing suffocation. That could take days, so often the victim’s legs would be broken below the knees with a club, causing massive shock and eliminating any further possibility of easing the pressure on the bound or spiked wrists. Usually a body was left on the cross to rot, but in some instances was given to relatives or friends for burial.<\/p>\n<h5>The Jewish Mode<\/h5>\n<p>A different form of crucifixion is seen in the OT. King Saul’s body was decapitated and affixed to a wall by the Philistines (1 Sm 31:9-10). The Persian king Darius made impaling the penalty for altering his decree (Ezr 6:11). According to Deuteronomy 21:22-23, the Eastern form was employed by the Jews with the added proviso that the body must be removed from “the tree” before nightfall, because the victim was “accursed by God” (cf. Gal 3:13) and must not remain to “defile the land.” The Roman form of crucifixion was not employed by the Jews. The only exception was a mass crucifixion of 800 rebels by the Jewish ruler Alexander Janneus in 76 <span>BC<\/span>, reported by the Jewish historian Josephus as being universally condemned by the Jews. Some believe that Jewish courts did practice the Western method of crucifixion after the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsCrucifixion\">Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The NT (quoted in this article from the <span>rsv<\/span>) has much to say about Christ’s crucifixion because it is the central theme of the Christian faith.<\/p>\n<h5>The Predictions<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospels record three predictions by Christ of his own crucifixion (Mk 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34 and parallel passages). In addition, John recorded three sayings about the Son of Man being “lifted up” (Jn 3:14; 8:28; 12:32-33), which parallel the synoptic predictions. Several themes are interwoven into those passages: (1) Christ’s passion (a term used for his suffering on the cross) was part of God’s redemptive purpose (Mk 8:31, “must”). (2) Both Jew and Roman were guilty of “delivering” and of “killing” Jesus. (3) His death would be followed by vindication via the resurrection. (4) His death itself, in a paradoxical way, was seen as a means of his entering into “glory” (seen in the symbolism John attached to “lifted up”). Other sayings that hint at Jesus’ fate are his comment about the murder of the prophets (Mt 23:29-30; Lk 13:33), his parables about the death of the prophets and the “son” (the marriage feast, Mt 22:1-14; the wicked tenants, Mk 12:1-10), and his teachings about the coming similar suffering of his disciples (Mt 10:24-28; Mk 8:34-35; Jn 15:18-25).<\/p>\n<h5>The Historical Event<\/h5>\n<p>The crucifixion of Jesus combined Roman and Jewish elements. Although the Gospel writers stressed Jewish guilt for their own polemical purposes, they were careful to distinguish between the leaders and the common people. It was the leaders who initiated Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43) and his trial by the Sanhedrin (vv 53-64). Though Pilate seemed to vacillate and in the end surrendered weakly to the crowds by “washing his hands” of any guilt (Mt 27:24), Rome was clearly implicated in the Crucifixion. Since the Sanhedrin did not have the power to inflict capital punishment, Pilate’s decision was necessary before crucifixion could occur. Further, Romans actually carried out the execution.<\/p>\n<p>At Jesus’ crucifixion Roman custom was observed in his scourging, his mock enthronement and stripping, the bearing of his own crossbeam, his being nailed to the cross, and the breaking of the two thieves’ legs. The elevated site fits the custom of displaying certain criminals publicly. So does the height of Jesus’ cross, probably seven to nine feet (2 to 3 meters). The presence of a tablet bearing the inscription “The King of the Jews” on the cross suggests that the crossbeam was fixed somewhere below the top of the stake. Jewish elements are seen in the wine mixed with myrrh (Mk 15:23), the vinegar on the hyssop reed (v 36), and the removal of the body before sunset and the beginning of the Sabbath (Jn 19:31).<\/p>\n<p>Although the fact of Jesus’ crucifixion is seldom challenged historically, the varying details in the four Gospels are sometimes regarded as later additions due to the influence of prophetic “fulfillment,” to Christian-Jewish polemics or to cultic considerations. However, one cannot conclude from the differences in the Gospel accounts that the details are not historical. Narrative selectivity on the part of the Gospel writers is in no sense evidence of fabrication.<\/p>\n<h5>The Emphasis in Each Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The elements found in the individual passion narratives were selected by each writer to present a particular view of the crucifixion scene. It has been realized for some time that the Gospel writers were not only historians but also theologians, selecting scenes and portraying them to show the significance of the events for the Christian faith. Their selection is poignantly evident in the crucifixion narratives.<\/p>\n<p>Mark and Matthew both show the horror of the Messiah being put to death by human beings. The first half of Mark’s scene contrasts the taunts of the crowd with the true significance of Jesus’ death. The twofold “save yourself” (Mk 15:29-31) repeats Jesus’ words about rebuilding the temple in three days—prophetically pointing to the resurrection. The second half of Mark’s description stresses the horror of the scene, progressing from a darkness motif to the cry of abandonment to further taunts (vv 33-36).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew extends Mark’s imagery in certain important directions, adding that Jesus refused the stupefying drink (a drugged wine to alleviate pain) “when he tasted it” (Mt 27:34), as well as adding “yielded up his spirit” to the death scene (v 50). Matthew thus emphasizes that Jesus voluntarily faced his death fully conscious and in complete control of himself. Matthew’s irony and allusion also bring out the disparity between Jesus’ suffering and his vindication. Elements of vindication include the ripping of the temple veil (v 51) and the centurion’s testimony (v 54). In the remarkable supernatural scene of Matthew 27:52-53, Jesus’ death is followed immediately by an earthquake that opened tombs and revived “many bodies of the saints” who had died. For Matthew those events and others inaugurated the last days, the new age of salvation, when the power of death is broken and life is made available for all.<\/p>\n<p>The account in Luke’s Gospel is also quite remarkable. It has two major thrusts. First, Jesus is portrayed as the perfect example of the righteous martyr who forgives his enemies and by his attitude converts some of his opponents. The taunts of the rulers and soldiers are reversed when the crowd returns home “beating their breasts” (Lk 23:48) and the centurion cries, “Certainly this man was innocent!” (v 47). Second, in Luke the entire setting has an atmosphere of reverence and worship. Omitted are the wine and myrrh, the cry of abandonment, and the Elijah taunt. Other episodes are noted instead—in particular, the prayers of Jesus. In Luke alone are related (1) Jesus’ prayer that God forgive his executioners, placing it in contrast with the soldiers’ mockery; (2) the promise in answer to the prayer of the “believing” criminal; and (3) the commitment of Jesus’ spirit to the Father. Luke’s presentation makes the Crucifixion a kind of worshipful commemoration.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John also one finds a change of theological focus. It goes further than Luke in removing shocking details such as the darkness and the taunts. Calm pervades throughout. Stress is laid on Jesus’ sovereign control of his situation, as the Crucifixion virtually becomes a coronation procession. John alone states that the inscription on the cross was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek—the charge thus becomes a worldwide proclamation of Christ’s enthronement. The inscription, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews,” continues Pilate’s dialogue on kingship beyond Jesus’ trial. John thus adds to Matthew’s emphasis: Jesus has not only become king but has been sovereign all along. The king is pictured as performing the priestly function and himself becoming the sacrifice. John alone mentions the hyssop (which had been used to sprinkle the blood of the lamb at the Passover, Ex 12:22) and Jesus’ cry, “It is finished” (Jn 19:29-30). Further, the piercing of Jesus’ side (vv 31-37), which shows the reality of his death, may also be seen symbolically, along with the “rivers of living water” (7:37-38), as typifying the outpouring of life in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, each Gospel pictures the meaning of Jesus’ death from a different vantage point. To combine their pictures gives new understanding of the significance of the cross. Rather than contradiction, one sees separate parts of a compelling whole.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTheologicalSignificanceofChristsCrucifixion\">The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The cross plays a dual role in Christian theology. Some theologians emphasize the significance of the historical crucifixion of Jesus Christ and what it accomplished for the believer. Others focus on the symbolism of the cross in each believer’s life.<\/p>\n<p>The death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth are the central events of Christian theology. The cross has meaning because of the significance of the person who was put to death on it and because of what his death accomplished. “The word of the cross” was central in the salvation proclamation of the early church. Above all, the event of the cross was God’s principal saving act in history; hence the cross, though a past event, has present significance. Christ crucified and risen is the core of the church’s message (Gal 3:1).<\/p>\n<p>The central passage is 1 Corinthians 1:17–2:5. There the “word of the cross” (1:18) is contrasted with “eloquent wisdom” (v 17). Sounding like foolishness, it is offensive to both Greek philosophy and Jewish legalism (cf. Gal 6:12-15), but that very “weakness” in human eyes opens the door for the “power of God” (1 Cor 1:18). The cross in the church’s <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kerygma<\/span> (proclamation) illustrates the pattern of God’s action: he forges out of the debilitated things of life both power and wisdom (vv 26-30). Because philosophical speculation replaces God’s message with human wisdom and thus empties the cross of its significance, Paul rejected “lofty words” and preached only the “crucified Christ.” The “Holy Spirit’s power” thus became evident in Paul’s “weakness” (2:1-5). The central core of the gospel is God’s demonstration of victory emerging from seeming defeat, of power arising out of infirmity.<\/p>\n<p>The cross as the basis of atonement is the principal emphasis in the Epistles (see Eph 2:16; Col 1:20; 2:14), whereas in the book of Acts the resurrection seems more central (see Acts 2:33-36; 3:19-26; 13:37-39). The reason for the different emphasis is found in the different purposes of those writings: the cross tends to be used in didactic (instructional) sections, the resurrection in apologetic (persuasive) or kerygmatic sections, when the basis for salvation is being presented. In actuality they were a single event in salvation history. Jesus “was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Rom 4:25).<\/p>\n<p>Paul expressed the significance of the cross in the words “redemption,” “propitiation,” and “justification.” The first two concepts have the “for us” theme traceable to the suffering servant (Is 53:10-12), whose death was for “the sin of many.” The idea of redemption in both Testaments is the payment of a price to “ransom” those held captive. That price, the NT explains, was paid on the cross, and humanity was thereby freed from sin (Mk 10:45; Ti 2:14; 1 Pt 1:18). The connection between Jesus’ death and the substitutionary preposition “instead of” is also seen in Galatians 3:13, which adds to the curse of Deuteronomy 21:23 the interpretation “for us” (cf. Rom 5:10-11, 18; 1 Cor 11:24; Eph 1:7; 2:13). Similarly, Paul’s concept of justification centers on the cross. It is “Christ crucified” who declares humanity righteous and makes freedom from sin possible (Rom 6:6; Gal 2:19-21). Human guilt was transferred to the cross and expiated there, opening up God’s forensic (legal) forgiveness of all who avail themselves of its power (1 Pt 1:18-21; 2:24; 3:18). Finally, the result is “reconciliation”—both vertically, between humans and God (Col 1:20), and horizontally, between previously opposed human forces (e.g., in Eph 2:13-16, between Jew and Gentile).<\/p>\n<p>Beyond the theological meaning of the literal cross on which Jesus Christ was put to death in Judea nearly 2,000 years ago is the symbolic significance of the cross for his followers today.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus made “bearing the cross” a condition of discipleship in five passages. There are two major variants: one, found in the material common to Matthew and Luke (Mt 10:38; Lk 14:27), is phrased negatively (“cannot be my disciple”); the other, which is found in all three synoptic Gospels (Mt 16:24; Mk 8:34; Luke 9:23), is phrased positively (“If anyone would come after me”). Two major motifs are found in the sayings. The major motif comes from the imagery of a condemned man carrying his cross to an execution site; a necessary part of discipleship is a daily (Lk 9:23) willingness to sacrifice all and to suffer for the sake of Christ. The central point is not death but disgrace; the disciple must be ready to become an outcast from society.<\/p>\n<p>Paul extended Christ’s metaphor to the death of self. He may have taken the idea from the early catechism, as seen in the baptismal creed of Romans 6:1-8, which identifies baptism as being “buried with him.” Paul interpreted the Christian’s identification with Christ’s death to mean that “our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin” (Rom 6:6). As further developed in 2 Corinthians 5:14-17, the believer participates in the death and resurrection of Christ, so that the old life has passed away and the new has come (5:17). The same view is found also in Galatians, which contrasts the mystical death of self to the legalistic system of the Judaizers. The believer is “crucified with Christ,” with the result that “it is no longer I who live” (Gal 2:20); “the flesh with its passions and desires” is “crucified” (5:24); and “far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (6:14). Believers must experience the cross before they can find the resurrection life.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Criminal Law and Punishment; Eli, Eli, Lema Sabachthani; Golgotha; Redeemer, Redemption; Seven Last Sayings of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRUCIFIXION<\/h3>\n<p>Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>• Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<h5>The Pagan Mode<\/h5>\n<p>Literally, the word “cross” in Greek referred to a pointed stake used for various purposes, including an instrument of execution. It could be an upright stake, used to impale a victim, or a vertical stake with a crossbeam either across the top (T) or across the middle (+), used to hang or crucify a criminal, with the added disgrace of public display. Evidently crucifixion was practiced first by the Medes and Persians and later by Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>), the Carthaginians, and the Romans. Both Greeks and Romans restricted its use to slaves, considering it too barbaric for citizens. In the imperial era the Romans extended the use to foreigners, but even so it was used mainly for crimes against the state.<\/p>\n<p>Crucifixion was universally recognized as the most horrible type of execution. In the East, in fact, it was used only as a further sign of disgrace for prisoners already executed, usually by decapitation. In the West the condemned criminal was scourged (whipped), usually at the place of execution, and forced to carry the crossbeam to the spot where a stake had already been erected. A tablet stating the crime was often placed around the offender’s neck and was fastened to the cross after the execution. The prisoner was commonly tied or sometimes nailed to the crossbeam (with the nails through the wrists, since the bones in the hand could not take the weight). The beam was then raised and fixed to the upright pole. If the executioners wished a particularly slow, agonizing death, they might drive blocks or pins into the stake for a seat or a step to support the feet. Death came about either through loss of blood circulation followed by coronary failure or through the collapse of one’s lungs, causing suffocation. That could take days, so often the victim’s legs would be broken below the knees with a club, causing massive shock and eliminating any further possibility of easing the pressure on the bound or spiked wrists. Usually a body was left on the cross to rot, but in some instances was given to relatives or friends for burial.<\/p>\n<h5>The Jewish Mode<\/h5>\n<p>A different form of crucifixion is seen in the OT. King Saul’s body was decapitated and affixed to a wall by the Philistines (1 Sm 31:9-10). The Persian king Darius made impaling the penalty for altering his decree (Ezr 6:11). According to Deuteronomy 21:22-23, the Eastern form was employed by the Jews with the added proviso that the body must be removed from “the tree” before nightfall, because the victim was “accursed by God” (cf. Gal 3:13) and must not remain to “defile the land.” The Roman form of crucifixion was not employed by the Jews. The only exception was a mass crucifixion of 800 rebels by the Jewish ruler Alexander Janneus in 76 <span>BC<\/span>, reported by the Jewish historian Josephus as being universally condemned by the Jews. Some believe that Jewish courts did practice the Western method of crucifixion after the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsCrucifixion\">Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The NT (quoted in this article from the <span>rsv<\/span>) has much to say about Christ’s crucifixion because it is the central theme of the Christian faith.<\/p>\n<h5>The Predictions<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospels record three predictions by Christ of his own crucifixion (Mk 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34 and parallel passages). In addition, John recorded three sayings about the Son of Man being “lifted up” (Jn 3:14; 8:28; 12:32-33), which parallel the synoptic predictions. Several themes are interwoven into those passages: (1) Christ’s passion (a term used for his suffering on the cross) was part of God’s redemptive purpose (Mk 8:31, “must”). (2) Both Jew and Roman were guilty of “delivering” and of “killing” Jesus. (3) His death would be followed by vindication via the resurrection. (4) His death itself, in a paradoxical way, was seen as a means of his entering into “glory” (seen in the symbolism John attached to “lifted up”). Other sayings that hint at Jesus’ fate are his comment about the murder of the prophets (Mt 23:29-30; Lk 13:33), his parables about the death of the prophets and the “son” (the marriage feast, Mt 22:1-14; the wicked tenants, Mk 12:1-10), and his teachings about the coming similar suffering of his disciples (Mt 10:24-28; Mk 8:34-35; Jn 15:18-25).<\/p>\n<h5>The Historical Event<\/h5>\n<p>The crucifixion of Jesus combined Roman and Jewish elements. Although the Gospel writers stressed Jewish guilt for their own polemical purposes, they were careful to distinguish between the leaders and the common people. It was the leaders who initiated Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43) and his trial by the Sanhedrin (vv 53-64). Though Pilate seemed to vacillate and in the end surrendered weakly to the crowds by “washing his hands” of any guilt (Mt 27:24), Rome was clearly implicated in the Crucifixion. Since the Sanhedrin did not have the power to inflict capital punishment, Pilate’s decision was necessary before crucifixion could occur. Further, Romans actually carried out the execution.<\/p>\n<p>At Jesus’ crucifixion Roman custom was observed in his scourging, his mock enthronement and stripping, the bearing of his own crossbeam, his being nailed to the cross, and the breaking of the two thieves’ legs. The elevated site fits the custom of displaying certain criminals publicly. So does the height of Jesus’ cross, probably seven to nine feet (2 to 3 meters). The presence of a tablet bearing the inscription “The King of the Jews” on the cross suggests that the crossbeam was fixed somewhere below the top of the stake. Jewish elements are seen in the wine mixed with myrrh (Mk 15:23), the vinegar on the hyssop reed (v 36), and the removal of the body before sunset and the beginning of the Sabbath (Jn 19:31).<\/p>\n<p>Although the fact of Jesus’ crucifixion is seldom challenged historically, the varying details in the four Gospels are sometimes regarded as later additions due to the influence of prophetic “fulfillment,” to Christian-Jewish polemics or to cultic considerations. However, one cannot conclude from the differences in the Gospel accounts that the details are not historical. Narrative selectivity on the part of the Gospel writers is in no sense evidence of fabrication.<\/p>\n<h5>The Emphasis in Each Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The elements found in the individual passion narratives were selected by each writer to present a particular view of the crucifixion scene. It has been realized for some time that the Gospel writers were not only historians but also theologians, selecting scenes and portraying them to show the significance of the events for the Christian faith. Their selection is poignantly evident in the crucifixion narratives.<\/p>\n<p>Mark and Matthew both show the horror of the Messiah being put to death by human beings. The first half of Mark’s scene contrasts the taunts of the crowd with the true significance of Jesus’ death. The twofold “save yourself” (Mk 15:29-31) repeats Jesus’ words about rebuilding the temple in three days—prophetically pointing to the resurrection. The second half of Mark’s description stresses the horror of the scene, progressing from a darkness motif to the cry of abandonment to further taunts (vv 33-36).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew extends Mark’s imagery in certain important directions, adding that Jesus refused the stupefying drink (a drugged wine to alleviate pain) “when he tasted it” (Mt 27:34), as well as adding “yielded up his spirit” to the death scene (v 50). Matthew thus emphasizes that Jesus voluntarily faced his death fully conscious and in complete control of himself. Matthew’s irony and allusion also bring out the disparity between Jesus’ suffering and his vindication. Elements of vindication include the ripping of the temple veil (v 51) and the centurion’s testimony (v 54). In the remarkable supernatural scene of Matthew 27:52-53, Jesus’ death is followed immediately by an earthquake that opened tombs and revived “many bodies of the saints” who had died. For Matthew those events and others inaugurated the last days, the new age of salvation, when the power of death is broken and life is made available for all.<\/p>\n<p>The account in Luke’s Gospel is also quite remarkable. It has two major thrusts. First, Jesus is portrayed as the perfect example of the righteous martyr who forgives his enemies and by his attitude converts some of his opponents. The taunts of the rulers and soldiers are reversed when the crowd returns home “beating their breasts” (Lk 23:48) and the centurion cries, “Certainly this man was innocent!” (v 47). Second, in Luke the entire setting has an atmosphere of reverence and worship. Omitted are the wine and myrrh, the cry of abandonment, and the Elijah taunt. Other episodes are noted instead—in particular, the prayers of Jesus. In Luke alone are related (1) Jesus’ prayer that God forgive his executioners, placing it in contrast with the soldiers’ mockery; (2) the promise in answer to the prayer of the “believing” criminal; and (3) the commitment of Jesus’ spirit to the Father. Luke’s presentation makes the Crucifixion a kind of worshipful commemoration.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John also one finds a change of theological focus. It goes further than Luke in removing shocking details such as the darkness and the taunts. Calm pervades throughout. Stress is laid on Jesus’ sovereign control of his situation, as the Crucifixion virtually becomes a coronation procession. John alone states that the inscription on the cross was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek—the charge thus becomes a worldwide proclamation of Christ’s enthronement. The inscription, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews,” continues Pilate’s dialogue on kingship beyond Jesus’ trial. John thus adds to Matthew’s emphasis: Jesus has not only become king but has been sovereign all along. The king is pictured as performing the priestly function and himself becoming the sacrifice. John alone mentions the hyssop (which had been used to sprinkle the blood of the lamb at the Passover, Ex 12:22) and Jesus’ cry, “It is finished” (Jn 19:29-30). Further, the piercing of Jesus’ side (vv 31-37), which shows the reality of his death, may also be seen symbolically, along with the “rivers of living water” (7:37-38), as typifying the outpouring of life in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, each Gospel pictures the meaning of Jesus’ death from a different vantage point. To combine their pictures gives new understanding of the significance of the cross. Rather than contradiction, one sees separate parts of a compelling whole.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTheologicalSignificanceofChristsCrucifixion\">The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The cross plays a dual role in Christian theology. Some theologians emphasize the significance of the historical crucifixion of Jesus Christ and what it accomplished for the believer. Others focus on the symbolism of the cross in each believer’s life.<\/p>\n<p>The death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth are the central events of Christian theology. The cross has meaning because of the significance of the person who was put to death on it and because of what his death accomplished. “The word of the cross” was central in the salvation proclamation of the early church. Above all, the event of the cross was God’s principal saving act in history; hence the cross, though a past event, has present significance. Christ crucified and risen is the core of the church’s message (Gal 3:1).<\/p>\n<p>The central passage is 1 Corinthians 1:17–2:5. There the “word of the cross” (1:18) is contrasted with “eloquent wisdom” (v 17). Sounding like foolishness, it is offensive to both Greek philosophy and Jewish legalism (cf. Gal 6:12-15), but that very “weakness” in human eyes opens the door for the “power of God” (1 Cor 1:18). The cross in the church’s <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kerygma<\/span> (proclamation) illustrates the pattern of God’s action: he forges out of the debilitated things of life both power and wisdom (vv 26-30). Because philosophical speculation replaces God’s message with human wisdom and thus empties the cross of its significance, Paul rejected “lofty words” and preached only the “crucified Christ.” The “Holy Spirit’s power” thus became evident in Paul’s “weakness” (2:1-5). The central core of the gospel is God’s demonstration of victory emerging from seeming defeat, of power arising out of infirmity.<\/p>\n<p>The cross as the basis of atonement is the principal emphasis in the Epistles (see Eph 2:16; Col 1:20; 2:14), whereas in the book of Acts the resurrection seems more central (see Acts 2:33-36; 3:19-26; 13:37-39). The reason for the different emphasis is found in the different purposes of those writings: the cross tends to be used in didactic (instructional) sections, the resurrection in apologetic (persuasive) or kerygmatic sections, when the basis for salvation is being presented. In actuality they were a single event in salvation history. Jesus “was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Rom 4:25).<\/p>\n<p>Paul expressed the significance of the cross in the words “redemption,” “propitiation,” and “justification.” The first two concepts have the “for us” theme traceable to the suffering servant (Is 53:10-12), whose death was for “the sin of many.” The idea of redemption in both Testaments is the payment of a price to “ransom” those held captive. That price, the NT explains, was paid on the cross, and humanity was thereby freed from sin (Mk 10:45; Ti 2:14; 1 Pt 1:18). The connection between Jesus’ death and the substitutionary preposition “instead of” is also seen in Galatians 3:13, which adds to the curse of Deuteronomy 21:23 the interpretation “for us” (cf. Rom 5:10-11, 18; 1 Cor 11:24; Eph 1:7; 2:13). Similarly, Paul’s concept of justification centers on the cross. It is “Christ crucified” who declares humanity righteous and makes freedom from sin possible (Rom 6:6; Gal 2:19-21). Human guilt was transferred to the cross and expiated there, opening up God’s forensic (legal) forgiveness of all who avail themselves of its power (1 Pt 1:18-21; 2:24; 3:18). Finally, the result is “reconciliation”—both vertically, between humans and God (Col 1:20), and horizontally, between previously opposed human forces (e.g., in Eph 2:13-16, between Jew and Gentile).<\/p>\n<p>Beyond the theological meaning of the literal cross on which Jesus Christ was put to death in Judea nearly 2,000 years ago is the symbolic significance of the cross for his followers today.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus made “bearing the cross” a condition of discipleship in five passages. There are two major variants: one, found in the material common to Matthew and Luke (Mt 10:38; Lk 14:27), is phrased negatively (“cannot be my disciple”); the other, which is found in all three synoptic Gospels (Mt 16:24; Mk 8:34; Luke 9:23), is phrased positively (“If anyone would come after me”). Two major motifs are found in the sayings. The major motif comes from the imagery of a condemned man carrying his cross to an execution site; a necessary part of discipleship is a daily (Lk 9:23) willingness to sacrifice all and to suffer for the sake of Christ. The central point is not death but disgrace; the disciple must be ready to become an outcast from society.<\/p>\n<p>Paul extended Christ’s metaphor to the death of self. He may have taken the idea from the early catechism, as seen in the baptismal creed of Romans 6:1-8, which identifies baptism as being “buried with him.” Paul interpreted the Christian’s identification with Christ’s death to mean that “our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin” (Rom 6:6). As further developed in 2 Corinthians 5:14-17, the believer participates in the death and resurrection of Christ, so that the old life has passed away and the new has come (5:17). The same view is found also in Galatians, which contrasts the mystical death of self to the legalistic system of the Judaizers. The believer is “crucified with Christ,” with the result that “it is no longer I who live” (Gal 2:20); “the flesh with its passions and desires” is “crucified” (5:24); and “far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (6:14). Believers must experience the cross before they can find the resurrection life.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Criminal Law and Punishment; Eli, Eli, Lema Sabachthani; Golgotha; Redeemer, Redemption; Seven Last Sayings of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRUCIFIXION Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation....","summary_en":"CRUCIFIXION Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation....","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11330,"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":12290,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Serpent*, Fiery","title_en":"Serpent*, Fiery","content_ro":"<h3>FIERY SERPENT*<\/h3>\n<p>Bronze symbol of a snake made by Moses on God’s instruction to save the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>Deadly snakes were sent by God to punish the Israelites for their rebellious grumblings, many of whom died from the poisonous bites (Nm 21:4-9). Recognizing their sin, they cried out to God for deliverance, and he instructed Moses to make a fiery (bronze) serpent and set it on a pole. Healing was granted to those who gazed at the uplifted figure.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus Christ referred to the bronze serpent incident as a symbol of the saving power of his crucifixion. A person who looks in faith to the uplifted Christ will receive deliverance from sin and have eternal life (Jn 3:14-15). The apostle Paul also drew upon the OT event as a warning to those who might arrogantly test God (1 Cor 10:9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bronze Serpent, Bronze Snake.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FIERY SERPENT*<\/h3>\n<p>Bronze symbol of a snake made by Moses on God’s instruction to save the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>Deadly snakes were sent by God to punish the Israelites for their rebellious grumblings, many of whom died from the poisonous bites (Nm 21:4-9). Recognizing their sin, they cried out to God for deliverance, and he instructed Moses to make a fiery (bronze) serpent and set it on a pole. Healing was granted to those who gazed at the uplifted figure.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus Christ referred to the bronze serpent incident as a symbol of the saving power of his crucifixion. A person who looks in faith to the uplifted Christ will receive deliverance from sin and have eternal life (Jn 3:14-15). The apostle Paul also drew upon the OT event as a warning to those who might arrogantly test God (1 Cor 10:9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bronze Serpent, Bronze Snake.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FIERY SERPENT* Bronze symbol of a snake made by Moses on God’s instruction to save the Israelites. Deadly snakes were sent by God to punish the Israelites for their rebellious grumblings, many of whom died from the poisonous bites (Nm 21:4-9). Recognizing their sin, they cried out to God for deliverance, and he instructed Moses to make a fiery (bronze) serpent and set it on a pole. Healing was granted to those who gazed at the uplifted figure. Jesus Christ referred to the bronze serpent incid...","summary_en":"FIERY SERPENT* Bronze symbol of a snake made by Moses on God’s instruction to save the Israelites. Deadly snakes were sent by God to punish the Israelites for their rebellious grumblings, many of whom died from the poisonous bites (Nm 21:4-9). Recognizing their sin, they cried out to God for deliverance, and he instructed Moses to make a fiery (bronze) serpent and set it on a pole. Healing was granted to those who gazed at the uplifted figure. Jesus Christ referred to the bronze serpent incid...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17148,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Idolatry Idols","title_en":"Idolatry Idols","content_ro":"<h3>IDOLS, IDOLATRY<\/h3>\n<p>Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (<span>rsv<\/span>) around the altar, they cut themselves with swords and lances (1 Kgs 18:26-29). Baal worship was widely followed by Israel during the period of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Abraham’s ancestors were worshipers of idols in Mesopotamia (Jos 24:2). Archaeological excavations in that area have revealed the images of numerous deities, and Mesopotamian religious literature reveals the gross polytheism out of which Abraham came. The tendency of the Israelites toward idolatry was in part the expression of the universal human longing for a god one can see and know through the physical senses.<\/p>\n<p>Most of the idolatry of the Israelites was borrowed from their neighbors. During the more than 400 years that the descendants of Jacob spent in Egypt, they were exposed to polytheistic idolatry, which influenced their religious mind-set. At Sinai, while Moses was receiving the Ten Commandments from the Lord, the people were demanding that Aaron make gods for them (Ex 32:1-6). He fashioned a golden calf, following an Egyptian form, for the whole bovine family was worshiped in Egypt—the Apis bull, the Hathor cow, and the Mnevis calf.<\/p>\n<p>It was after his stay in Egypt (1 Kgs 11:40) that Jeroboam became king of Israel and set up golden calves, one at Bethel and one at Dan (12:26-33), an action that earned him the label as being the one who made Israel sin (2 Kgs 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>Already in patriarchal times there are references to the teraphim, or household gods. Examples of these idols have been found at Ur of the Chaldees, Nuzi, and other sites, and are referred to in the cuneiform tablets. The teraphim that Rachel stole from Laban could be hidden in her camel’s saddlebag (Gn 31:34). It seems, however, that in the time of David such idols were larger, for when Saul’s men came to kill David, Michal, David’s wife and the daughter of Saul, helped David to escape and then took such an image and placed it in a bed to make the men think that David was sick (1 Sm 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>The prohibition of idolatry is explicitly stated in the second commandment (Ex 20:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>): “Do not make idols of any kind, whether in the shape of birds or animals or fish. You must never worship or bow down to them, for I, the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, am a jealous God who will not share your affection with any other god!” (cf. Ex 34:17; Lv 19:4; 26:1; Dt 4:15-19; 27:1-5). This commandment is an extension or auxiliary of the first, for it seeks to preserve God’s uniqueness and to protect his glory. The definition of idolatry was broadened during the time of Samuel, who confronted King Saul with the charge that stubbornness is the same as idolatry (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Previous to the conquest of Canaan, the Lord kept warning Israel against marrying members of the native populace, which he had ordered Israel to annihilate. This measure was intended to prevent the weakening of moral life in Israel (Ex 34:16; Dt 7:3-4). This principle is again expanded in the NT (cf. 1 Cor 15:33; 2 Cor 6:14). The history of Israel demonstrated the practicality of the prohibition against such marriages, for they inevitably led to apostasy. Perhaps the saddest example is Solomon (1 Kgs 11:1-8). When Solomon was old, his wives turned his heart to other gods, so that he was not wholly true to the Lord his God (v 4).<\/p>\n<p>In the time of the judges there was an infamous case of idol worship (Jgs 17:1–18:31). The mother of an Ephraimite named Micah took 200 pieces of silver and had a silversmith make them into a graven image for her son. He also had a shrine, an ephod, and teraphim. He hired a wandering Levite to be his priest, but men from the tribe of Dan came along and took the Levite, the image, and all the accoutrements and set up this idol at Dan and used it as an object of their worship (18:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture the kings of Israel are evaluated on the basis of what they did with respect to the “high places” and idols. Asa removed all the idols his ancestors had made (1 Kgs 15:12) and would not let Maacah be queen mother because she had an abominable image made for Asherah. He cut down and burned the image (v 13). The Israelite king Ahab, however, was an idolater (1 Kgs 21:26; cf. 16:30-33).<\/p>\n<p>Hezekiah destroyed the high places, broke down the pillars, and cut down the Asherim (2 Kgs 18:4; 2 Chr 31:1). He also put an end to a strange cult that illustrates the insidious nature of idolatry. The bronze serpent that Moses lifted up on a pole to save the Israelites from death by snakebite (Nm 21:9; cf. Jn 3:14) had been preserved until the time of Hezekiah. It had been given the name Nehushtan, and people venerated it and burned incense to it. Hezekiah destroyed it (2 Kgs 18:4) because what had been an instrument for good had become a thing of evil.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah described the making of an idol in human form (Is 40:19-20; 44:9-17). Images were cast in a mold using molten metal (40:19; 44:10). Statues were forged by smiths (44:12), carved from wood (44:13-17), and overlaid with precious metal (40:19). Small clay images and plaques were also molded and fired in a kiln, and statues were sculptured from stone. The psalmist spoke out against idols and images (Pss 96:5; 97:7; 106:34-39) and the helplessness of idols is described in Psalms 115:4-8 and 135:15-18.<\/p>\n<p>The northern and southern kingdoms of Israel went into captivity because they forsook God and served idols. The Jews were well aware that idolatry had brought them into captivity, and during their time in Babylon, they developed an abhorrence to idols that has characterized Judaism to this very day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The fullest discussion in the NT on idolatry <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatreia<\/span><em>)<\/em> and the idolworshiper <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatres<\/span><em>)<\/em> is found in Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians. In an earlier (no longer extant) epistle, Paul had told the Corinthians not to associate with those who called themselves believers but were still idol worshipers (1 Cor 5:9-11). After that letter the Corinthians must have asked Paul for clarification on this matter. Thus, in this epistle Paul provides a response to their question; the “idol worshiper” is mentioned in 5:10-11, 6:9, 10:7, and “idolatry” is spoken of in 10:14.<\/p>\n<p>The terms, “idolatry” and “idol worshiper,” are related to two other expressions: (1) “idol” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolon<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:4; 10:19; 12:2; and (2) “food sacrificed to idols” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolothutos<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:1, 4, 7; 10:19. The kind of idolatry that Paul condemns is that which involved Christians offering sacrifices to idols and then partaking of the food that had been sacrificed to them. The participants are called idol worshipers because their involvement in idolatrous sacrifices was perceived as having fellowship with demons. Paul strictly prohibited the eating of sacrificial food at the popular temples in the presence of idol-demons. As such, he shared the same view about idols as most Jews in his day. For the Jews, idols and heathen deities were identical. (See 1 Thes 1:9, where Paul contrasts “idols” with “the living and <em>true<\/em> God.”) To Paul, idols in and of themselves were nothing (1 Cor 8:4); behind the idol, however, was a demon (10:20).<\/p>\n<p>The eating of sacrificial food at the cultic meals in pagan temples was censured by Paul because it was understood that the participants thereby became united to demons (see 1 Cor 10:19-21). However, Paul had no problem with those who purchased food that had been left over from these events and that was later sold in the marketplace. In his judgment, if they ate it at home, they were not participating in idolatry. They could eat this food with a good conscience—unless, of course, in doing so they would be the means of destroying a weaker believer. For the sake of such believers, one should abstain. This was a matter of conscience (10:25-29). But going to pagan festivities and eating meals offered to idols was not permitted in any form.<\/p>\n<p>The Corinthians had participated in these meals regularly before they became Christians and apparently had continued to do so after their conversion. In Corinth such meals were the regular practice both at national festivals and private celebrations. The “gods” (whom Paul considered “demons”) were thought to be present at these events because the sacrifices were made to them. Thus, to participate in these events was to join oneself to demons and thereby become an idol worshiper. The ancient Israelites had been carried away into idolatry by their pagan neighbors on several occasions when they were enticed to participate in these pagan celebrations (e.g., Nm 25; cf. Ex 32:6). The festivities involved all sorts of licentiousness. In 1 Corinthians 10, Paul referred to this apostasy of the Israelites and used it as a negative example. Because the Israelites became involved in pagan festivities, they were carried away into idolatry and fornication, which incited God’s wrath and brought destruction.<\/p>\n<p>In other Pauline Epistles, idolatry is mentioned but not with the kind of definition and extended discussion that is found in 1 Corinthians. Nonetheless, Paul speaks out against actual idolatry and what we might call figurative idolatry (i.e., idolatry in the sense of desiring something above God).<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 1:18-32 sexual licentiousness and other sins are ultimately traced to idolatry. The Gentiles, who should have known that God existed, as evidenced in creation and conscience, abandoned the immortal, invisible God in exchange for mortal, visible images (i.e., idols). Because of this abandonment, God gave them over to do the filthy things their hearts desired (Rom 1:24). Thus, idolatry is included in Paul’s list of what he calls “the works of the flesh” (see Gal 5:19-20). And those who are idol worshipers are included in the catalog of all those evil people who will not inherit the kingdom of God (see 1 Cor 6:9).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 5:5 Paul again includes idolaters among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God. However, such idolaters are not just those who go to pagan temples and worship idols; they are those who are greedy or covetous. According to superior manuscript evidence, the verse reads, “No fornicator or impure person or greedy person, which is the same as an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.” The point seems to be that the greedy, covetous person who makes his desires his god is much the same as an idolater. Thus, covetousness and idolatry are made synonymous. The parallel passage, Colossians 3:5, makes this explicit, which literally says covetousness is idolatry.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Gods and Goddesses; Grove; High Place.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>IDOLS, IDOLATRY<\/h3>\n<p>Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (<span>rsv<\/span>) around the altar, they cut themselves with swords and lances (1 Kgs 18:26-29). Baal worship was widely followed by Israel during the period of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Abraham’s ancestors were worshipers of idols in Mesopotamia (Jos 24:2). Archaeological excavations in that area have revealed the images of numerous deities, and Mesopotamian religious literature reveals the gross polytheism out of which Abraham came. The tendency of the Israelites toward idolatry was in part the expression of the universal human longing for a god one can see and know through the physical senses.<\/p>\n<p>Most of the idolatry of the Israelites was borrowed from their neighbors. During the more than 400 years that the descendants of Jacob spent in Egypt, they were exposed to polytheistic idolatry, which influenced their religious mind-set. At Sinai, while Moses was receiving the Ten Commandments from the Lord, the people were demanding that Aaron make gods for them (Ex 32:1-6). He fashioned a golden calf, following an Egyptian form, for the whole bovine family was worshiped in Egypt—the Apis bull, the Hathor cow, and the Mnevis calf.<\/p>\n<p>It was after his stay in Egypt (1 Kgs 11:40) that Jeroboam became king of Israel and set up golden calves, one at Bethel and one at Dan (12:26-33), an action that earned him the label as being the one who made Israel sin (2 Kgs 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>Already in patriarchal times there are references to the teraphim, or household gods. Examples of these idols have been found at Ur of the Chaldees, Nuzi, and other sites, and are referred to in the cuneiform tablets. The teraphim that Rachel stole from Laban could be hidden in her camel’s saddlebag (Gn 31:34). It seems, however, that in the time of David such idols were larger, for when Saul’s men came to kill David, Michal, David’s wife and the daughter of Saul, helped David to escape and then took such an image and placed it in a bed to make the men think that David was sick (1 Sm 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>The prohibition of idolatry is explicitly stated in the second commandment (Ex 20:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>): “Do not make idols of any kind, whether in the shape of birds or animals or fish. You must never worship or bow down to them, for I, the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, am a jealous God who will not share your affection with any other god!” (cf. Ex 34:17; Lv 19:4; 26:1; Dt 4:15-19; 27:1-5). This commandment is an extension or auxiliary of the first, for it seeks to preserve God’s uniqueness and to protect his glory. The definition of idolatry was broadened during the time of Samuel, who confronted King Saul with the charge that stubbornness is the same as idolatry (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Previous to the conquest of Canaan, the Lord kept warning Israel against marrying members of the native populace, which he had ordered Israel to annihilate. This measure was intended to prevent the weakening of moral life in Israel (Ex 34:16; Dt 7:3-4). This principle is again expanded in the NT (cf. 1 Cor 15:33; 2 Cor 6:14). The history of Israel demonstrated the practicality of the prohibition against such marriages, for they inevitably led to apostasy. Perhaps the saddest example is Solomon (1 Kgs 11:1-8). When Solomon was old, his wives turned his heart to other gods, so that he was not wholly true to the Lord his God (v 4).<\/p>\n<p>In the time of the judges there was an infamous case of idol worship (Jgs 17:1–18:31). The mother of an Ephraimite named Micah took 200 pieces of silver and had a silversmith make them into a graven image for her son. He also had a shrine, an ephod, and teraphim. He hired a wandering Levite to be his priest, but men from the tribe of Dan came along and took the Levite, the image, and all the accoutrements and set up this idol at Dan and used it as an object of their worship (18:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture the kings of Israel are evaluated on the basis of what they did with respect to the “high places” and idols. Asa removed all the idols his ancestors had made (1 Kgs 15:12) and would not let Maacah be queen mother because she had an abominable image made for Asherah. He cut down and burned the image (v 13). The Israelite king Ahab, however, was an idolater (1 Kgs 21:26; cf. 16:30-33).<\/p>\n<p>Hezekiah destroyed the high places, broke down the pillars, and cut down the Asherim (2 Kgs 18:4; 2 Chr 31:1). He also put an end to a strange cult that illustrates the insidious nature of idolatry. The bronze serpent that Moses lifted up on a pole to save the Israelites from death by snakebite (Nm 21:9; cf. Jn 3:14) had been preserved until the time of Hezekiah. It had been given the name Nehushtan, and people venerated it and burned incense to it. Hezekiah destroyed it (2 Kgs 18:4) because what had been an instrument for good had become a thing of evil.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah described the making of an idol in human form (Is 40:19-20; 44:9-17). Images were cast in a mold using molten metal (40:19; 44:10). Statues were forged by smiths (44:12), carved from wood (44:13-17), and overlaid with precious metal (40:19). Small clay images and plaques were also molded and fired in a kiln, and statues were sculptured from stone. The psalmist spoke out against idols and images (Pss 96:5; 97:7; 106:34-39) and the helplessness of idols is described in Psalms 115:4-8 and 135:15-18.<\/p>\n<p>The northern and southern kingdoms of Israel went into captivity because they forsook God and served idols. The Jews were well aware that idolatry had brought them into captivity, and during their time in Babylon, they developed an abhorrence to idols that has characterized Judaism to this very day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The fullest discussion in the NT on idolatry <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatreia<\/span><em>)<\/em> and the idolworshiper <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatres<\/span><em>)<\/em> is found in Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians. In an earlier (no longer extant) epistle, Paul had told the Corinthians not to associate with those who called themselves believers but were still idol worshipers (1 Cor 5:9-11). After that letter the Corinthians must have asked Paul for clarification on this matter. Thus, in this epistle Paul provides a response to their question; the “idol worshiper” is mentioned in 5:10-11, 6:9, 10:7, and “idolatry” is spoken of in 10:14.<\/p>\n<p>The terms, “idolatry” and “idol worshiper,” are related to two other expressions: (1) “idol” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolon<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:4; 10:19; 12:2; and (2) “food sacrificed to idols” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolothutos<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:1, 4, 7; 10:19. The kind of idolatry that Paul condemns is that which involved Christians offering sacrifices to idols and then partaking of the food that had been sacrificed to them. The participants are called idol worshipers because their involvement in idolatrous sacrifices was perceived as having fellowship with demons. Paul strictly prohibited the eating of sacrificial food at the popular temples in the presence of idol-demons. As such, he shared the same view about idols as most Jews in his day. For the Jews, idols and heathen deities were identical. (See 1 Thes 1:9, where Paul contrasts “idols” with “the living and <em>true<\/em> God.”) To Paul, idols in and of themselves were nothing (1 Cor 8:4); behind the idol, however, was a demon (10:20).<\/p>\n<p>The eating of sacrificial food at the cultic meals in pagan temples was censured by Paul because it was understood that the participants thereby became united to demons (see 1 Cor 10:19-21). However, Paul had no problem with those who purchased food that had been left over from these events and that was later sold in the marketplace. In his judgment, if they ate it at home, they were not participating in idolatry. They could eat this food with a good conscience—unless, of course, in doing so they would be the means of destroying a weaker believer. For the sake of such believers, one should abstain. This was a matter of conscience (10:25-29). But going to pagan festivities and eating meals offered to idols was not permitted in any form.<\/p>\n<p>The Corinthians had participated in these meals regularly before they became Christians and apparently had continued to do so after their conversion. In Corinth such meals were the regular practice both at national festivals and private celebrations. The “gods” (whom Paul considered “demons”) were thought to be present at these events because the sacrifices were made to them. Thus, to participate in these events was to join oneself to demons and thereby become an idol worshiper. The ancient Israelites had been carried away into idolatry by their pagan neighbors on several occasions when they were enticed to participate in these pagan celebrations (e.g., Nm 25; cf. Ex 32:6). The festivities involved all sorts of licentiousness. In 1 Corinthians 10, Paul referred to this apostasy of the Israelites and used it as a negative example. Because the Israelites became involved in pagan festivities, they were carried away into idolatry and fornication, which incited God’s wrath and brought destruction.<\/p>\n<p>In other Pauline Epistles, idolatry is mentioned but not with the kind of definition and extended discussion that is found in 1 Corinthians. Nonetheless, Paul speaks out against actual idolatry and what we might call figurative idolatry (i.e., idolatry in the sense of desiring something above God).<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 1:18-32 sexual licentiousness and other sins are ultimately traced to idolatry. The Gentiles, who should have known that God existed, as evidenced in creation and conscience, abandoned the immortal, invisible God in exchange for mortal, visible images (i.e., idols). Because of this abandonment, God gave them over to do the filthy things their hearts desired (Rom 1:24). Thus, idolatry is included in Paul’s list of what he calls “the works of the flesh” (see Gal 5:19-20). And those who are idol worshipers are included in the catalog of all those evil people who will not inherit the kingdom of God (see 1 Cor 6:9).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 5:5 Paul again includes idolaters among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God. However, such idolaters are not just those who go to pagan temples and worship idols; they are those who are greedy or covetous. According to superior manuscript evidence, the verse reads, “No fornicator or impure person or greedy person, which is the same as an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.” The point seems to be that the greedy, covetous person who makes his desires his god is much the same as an idolater. Thus, covetousness and idolatry are made synonymous. The parallel passage, Colossians 3:5, makes this explicit, which literally says covetousness is idolatry.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Gods and Goddesses; Grove; High Place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"IDOLS, IDOLATRY Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (rsv) around the altar, they cut themselves with...","summary_en":"IDOLS, IDOLATRY Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (rsv) around the altar, they cut themselves with...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17353,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Incarnation*","title_en":"Incarnation*","content_ro":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","summary_en":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19646,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23223,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Life","title_en":"Life","content_ro":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","summary_en":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26424,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>MOSES<\/h3>\n<p>Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:17; Ps 18:16). If, however, it is an Egyptian name given him by the daughter of Pharaoh who found him, it is more likely from an Egyptian word for “son” (also found as part of many well-known Egyptian names such as Ahmose, Thutmose, and Ramses). No one else in the OT bears this name.<\/p>\n<p>Without question, the greatest figure in the OT (mentioned by name 767 times), his influence also extends to the pages of the NT (where he is mentioned 79 times). The first 40 years of his life were spent in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), where he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. The next 40 years he spent in Midian as a fugitive from the wrath of Pharaoh, after killing an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. His last 40 years were devoted to leading the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt to the land God had promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gn 12:1-3). He died at the age of 120 after leading the Israelites successfully through 40 years of wandering in the wilderness to the very edge of the Promised Land on the east side of the Jordan River (Dt 34:7). He is one of the great figures in all of history, a man who took a group of slaves and, under inconceivably difficult circumstances, molded them into a nation that has influenced and altered the entire course of history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<p>• The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<p>• Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The only source of information for the life of Moses is the Bible. Archaeology confirms the credibility of the events associated with Moses, but it has never provided any specific confirmation of his existence or work. His story begins with the arrival in Egypt of Jacob, his sons, and their families during a time of famine in Canaan. Invited by Joseph and welcomed by Pharaoh, the family settled down in northeast Egypt in an area known as Goshen, where they remained for 430 years (Ex 12:40). With the passing of time, their numbers grew rapidly, so that the land was filled with them (1:7). A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph. The biblical account does not give the name of this pharaoh, and there has never been agreement as to his identity. He has most frequently been identified as Thutmose III (1504–1451 <span>BC<\/span>), Seti I (1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>), or Ramses II (1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). Out of fear that their growing numbers might become a threat to the security of his nation, Pharaoh determined to take measures to reduce their number. He put them to work building the store cities of Pithom and Rameses, but the severity of the work did not diminish them. He next tried to enlist the cooperation of the midwives to destroy the male babies, but they would not carry out his orders. He then ordered his own people to drown the male infants in the Nile River. Against the background of this first-known Jewish persecution, the baby Moses was born.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFirst40YearsInEgypt\">The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<h5>Birth and Early Life<\/h5>\n<p>A man of the family of Levi named Amram married his father’s sister Jochebed (Ex 6:20; cf. 2:1). Their first son, Aaron, three years older than Moses, was born before the command to drown the Hebrew babies was given, as there is no indication that his life was in danger. However, the cruel order was in force when Moses was born, and after three months, when his mother could no longer hide him, she took a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the baby into the basket and placed it among the reeds along the banks of the river. An older sister, Miriam, stayed near the river to see what would happen. Soon the daughter of Pharaoh (identified by Josephus as Thermuthis and by others as Hatshepsut, but whose actual identity cannot be determined) came to the river to bathe, as was her custom. She discovered the baby, recognized it as one of the Hebrew children, and determined that she would raise the child as her own. Miriam emerged from her hiding place and offered to secure a Hebrew woman to nurse the child, an arrangement that was agreeable to the princess. Miriam took the baby to his own mother, who kept him for perhaps two or three years (cf. 1 Sm 1:19-24). Nothing is recorded of those formative years. Whether his mother continued seeing him during his later childhood and young manhood or revealed his true identity to him or taught him the Hebrew faith are matters of speculation. Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, as would befit a member of the royal household, and he became mighty in his words and deeds (Acts 7:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Identification with His Own People<\/h5>\n<p>Just when Moses became aware that he was a Hebrew rather than Egyptian cannot be known, but it is clear that he knew it by the time he was 40 years old. One day he went out to visit his people and to observe their treatment, for the cruel measures taken against them by Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ birth had not been lifted. Seeing an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses in great anger killed the Egyptian and buried him. He thought the deed had gone unnoticed until the next day when he encountered two Hebrews fighting with each other. When he tried to act as peacemaker, they both turned on him and accused him of murder: “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” (Ex 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). Acts 7:25 adds: “He supposed that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Aware that being a member of Pharaoh’s household would not exempt him from punishment now that the deed was known, Moses fled for his life to the land of Midian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSecond40YearsInMidian\">The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<h5>Marriage into the Family of Jethro<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after arriving in Midian, Moses sat down by a well, where he observed the seven daughters of the priest of Midian who had come to the well to draw water for their father’s flock. Shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses intervened and helped them water their animals. When Jethro (Ex 3:1; also called Reuel, 2:18; Hobab, Nm 10:29) learned what had happened, he invited Moses to stay with his family and gave him Zipporah as his wife. (There is some disagreement among scholars regarding the identity of Hobab in Numbers 10:29; some think he was Moses’ father-in-law, while others maintain that Hobab was Moses’ brother-in-law. <em>See also<\/em> Hobab). Two children, Gershom (Ex 2:22) and Eliezer (18:4), were born to Moses and Zipporah during the years in Midian. Forty years passed, and Moses’ thoughts about his former life in Egypt must have faded into the past. He could not have foreseen that God would soon thrust him back into the midst of the court in Egypt, where he would confront the son of the now-dead pharaoh with the demand to release the Hebrew people from the bondage they had endured for so many years. God had not forgotten his people and was now ready to deliver them.<\/p>\n<h5>Encounter with God at the Burning Bush<\/h5>\n<p>One day, while Moses was taking care of the flocks of his father-in-law, he led them to Mt Horeb (known also as Sinai), where God appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush that burned but was not consumed. Moses approached to observe the strange sight more closely and heard God speak to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” Moses replied, “Here am I.” Before he could come any nearer to the bush, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). He further identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He assured Moses that he was aware of the cruel afflictions of his people and had heard their cries. Then he told of his plan to send Moses to Egypt to deliver his people from their bondage.<\/p>\n<p>Faced with a challenge that seemed beyond his capabilities, the aged Moses began making excuses for not accepting the task. God assured Moses that he would be with him (Ex 3:11-12). To his excuse that he would not be able to give an answer if the people asked him the name of the God he represented, God revealed his name in the cryptic statement, “ ‘<span>I Am the One Who Always Is<\/span>’ . . . Just tell them, ‘I <span>Am<\/span> has sent me to you’ ” (vv 13-14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many interpretations have been proposed for the name. Whatever else it means, it undoubtedly suggests the self-existence and all-sufficiency of God. Moses then argued that the people would not believe him when he told them that God had sent him to deliver them from Egypt. In response God gave him three signs: When he cast his shepherd’s rod to the ground, it became a serpent. When he put his hand to his bosom, it became leprous. He was also told that when he would pour water from the Nile on the ground, it would become blood (Ex 4:1-9). Even armed with these powerful evidences of the presence of God with him, Moses raised still another objection, “O Lord, I’m just not a good speaker. I never have been, and I’m not now, even after you have spoken to me. I’m clumsy with words” (v 10, <span>nlt<\/span>). God told him that he would teach him what to say, but despite such assurance, Moses asked God to send someone else. In anger mingled with compassion, God made Moses’ brother, Aaron, the spokesman, but said his instructions would still be given directly to Moses.<\/p>\n<h5>Return to Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>Moses took his wife and sons and set out for Egypt, telling his father-in-law only that he wanted to go back to Egypt to visit his kinsmen there (Ex 4:18). The biblical account says he put his wife and sons on the same donkey to journey back to Egypt (v 20). The fact that all three rode the same animal indicates that both children were quite young and had not been born in the early years of Moses’ marriage. At a lodging place along the way a strange thing happened. The Lord met him and sought to kill him (v 24), apparently because Moses had failed to circumcise the baby before leaving Midian. When Zipporah realized that Moses’ life was in danger, she performed the rite herself and said to her husband, “What a blood-smeared bridegroom you are to me!” (v 25, <span>nlt<\/span>). Whatever else may have been involved in this unusual encounter with God, it was a solemn reminder that the one who was to be the leader of the covenant people must not himself neglect any part of the covenant (Gn 17:10-14).<\/p>\n<p>God told Aaron (who was still in Egypt) to go to the mountain where Moses had encountered God at the burning bush and meet his brother there. Moses told Aaron everything that had happened, and together they went to Egypt, gathered the elders together, and informed them of these matters. When Moses and Aaron performed the signs in the presence of the people, they believed these leaders had been sent by God to deliver them from their affliction (Ex 4:30-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheThird40YearsFromEgypttoCanaan\">The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<h5>The Encounter with Pharaoh<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after his return to Egypt, Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went to Pharaoh and repeated the demands of the Lord, “Let my people go, for they must go out into the wilderness to hold a religious festival in my honor” (Ex 5:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Pharaoh rejected the demand with the observation that he had never heard of this God of Moses. When one realizes that Egyptian kings considered themselves to be gods, the affront to Pharaoh becomes even more acute. Not only did he reject Moses’ demands, but he intensified the burdens of the Hebrews. Their work had up until then required them to make brick using straw provided for them, but now Pharaoh said they would have to gather their own straw and still produce the same number of bricks. The Hebrews turned in anguish and anger to Moses and blamed him for making them offensive in the sight of Pharaoh. Even Moses could not understand the turn of events and complained bitterly to God. God reassured Moses that he would deliver the Hebrews from their bondage, and moreover, he would bring them into the land he had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He then instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and repeat the demand to release the Hebrews upon threat of severe reprisal if the demand were ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Ushered again into Pharaoh’s presence, Moses repeated his request for release of the Israelites. He attempted to impress Pharaoh by turning his rod into a serpent, but the Egyptian wise men, through their secret arts, were able to duplicate the miracle, so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened and he would not listen to Moses. In rapid succession Moses brought nine plagues upon the land of Egypt to show the omnipotence of God to force the compliance of Pharaoh. These included a plague in which the water of the Nile turned to blood, a plague of frogs, one of gnats, then of flies, a plague on the livestock, boils on the people, plagues of hail, locusts, and complete darkness. During the plagues of the frogs, flies, hail, locusts, and darkness, Pharaoh was distraught and would temporarily relent and agree to Moses’ demands, but as soon as the plague was lifted, his heart hardened and he would retract his promise. The outcome of the first nine plagues was terrible devastation of the land of Egypt, but the Israelites were not released. There was yet one more plague in store, the most terrible of all.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Passover<\/h5>\n<p>God told Moses that there remained one more plague in store for the Egyptians: “All the firstborn sons will die in every family in Egypt, from the oldest son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the oldest son of his lowliest slave. Even the firstborn of the animals will die” (Ex 11:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Furthermore, he assured Moses that the plague would not touch a single household of the Hebrews, “Then you will know that the <span>Lord<\/span> makes a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites” (v 7, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed the people through Moses and Aaron to make their preparations for leaving the land in haste. They were to go to the Egyptians and ask them for their jewels of silver and gold (Ex 11:2-3), a request to which the Egyptians agreed, perhaps out of fear of the Hebrews and in the belief that the gifts would bring about an end of the terrors that had struck the land. The Hebrews were also instructed to prepare a lamb for each family—small families could share—for the last meal to be eaten in the land of Egypt (a rite that became the pattern for the Jewish observance of the Passover for many centuries). Blood of the lamb was to be put on the doorposts and lintels of the houses in which the Passover meal was being eaten that night. The Hebrews were promised that wherever the blood was on the door, no harm would come to that household. They were also instructed to prepare unleavened bread. At midnight the death angel of the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh himself to the lowest captive in a dungeon; not a single house of the Egyptians escaped tragedy. When Pharaoh saw what had happened, he ordered Moses and the people to leave the land at once (12:31-32). The biblical record says that about 600,000 Hebrew men left Egypt. Together with women and children, the total would have been in excess of 2 million people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Exodus from Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The exodus is the central event of the OT and marks the birth of Israel as a nation. The Jewish people still look back to that event as the great redemptive act of God in history on behalf of his people, much as Christians look upon the cross as the great redemptive act of their faith.<\/p>\n\n<p>The exact route taken by the Hebrews out of Egypt cannot be determined today, though many possibilities have been proposed. They did not take the shortest, most direct route to Canaan (which would have been about a 10 days’ journey along the Mediterranean coastline), but set out in the direction of Mt Sinai, where Moses had earlier met God at the burning bush. As a sign that Moses had been sent to deliver the people, God told Moses he would bring them to that same spot, where they would worship God (Ex 3:12). The Hebrews did not forget the request of Joseph to carry his bones with them when they returned to their own land (Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19).<\/p>\n<p>As the people journeyed, they were preceded by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night. The cloud represented the presence of God with his people and guided them along the route they should travel.<\/p>\n<p>Back in Egypt, Pharaoh was having second thoughts about letting the Hebrews leave the land and decided to pursue them with his army and bring them back. When the Hebrews saw the approaching cloud of dust and realized that the Egyptian army was pursuing them, they were terrified. The sea lay ahead of them and the Egyptians were behind; there seemed to be no way of escape. The people turned on Moses, blaming him for bringing them out of Egypt. God again assured them that they did not need to be afraid or do anything to defend themselves. He promised to fight the battle for them and give them victory (Ex 14:14).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord parted the water of the Sea of Reeds (traditionally but erroneously referred to as the Red Sea) by a strong east wind and allowed the Israelites to pass through the sea on dry ground to the other side. The Egyptians rushed after the Israelites, following them into the dry bed of the sea. But before they reached the other side, the waters rushed back together, destroying the Egyptian army in the midst of the sea and leaving the Israelites safe on the other side. The people celebrated their great deliverance in song (Ex 15) and then continued their journey. The narrative that follows describes the struggle of the Israelites to survive in the desert—problems of food and water, internal dissension, murmurings against Moses, and battles with enemies. Through all their experiences, Moses towers as the unifying force and great spiritual leader.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of having seen God’s great act of deliverance so recently, the faith of the Israelites was not strong. Three days later they came to a place where the water was not fit to drink, and they began complaining against Moses. The Lord showed Moses how to purify the water, and the people’s needs were satisfied (Ex 15:22-25). When they reached the wilderness of Sin, they complained again, this time because of lack of food. God met their need by supplying manna, a breadlike substance that would serve as their food until they came to Canaan (16:1-21). Later, camped at Rephidim, the people complained again, this time for lack of water. Once again God met their needs by supplying water from the rock at Horeb (17:1-7). The Amalekites attacked them while they were still camped at Rephidim, but God gave a great victory to the Israelites (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the people reached Sinai and camped there. Jethro came to visit, bringing Moses’ wife and sons. Zipporah had apparently decided to return with her children to stay with her father rather than to go on to Egypt with Moses. It was a joyful reunion, and Jethro made a burnt offering and sacrifices to God (an act that has evoked the suggestion that Jethro was a true worshiper of God, though nothing is known of his links to the Hebrew faith). When Jethro observed Moses trying to settle all the disputes and problems of the Hebrews unaided, he proposed that Moses delegate responsibility for some of the lesser matters to able men chosen from among the people. Moses accepted the suggestion, and shortly afterward Jethro returned to his own land. He did not remain at Sinai to participate in the ratification of the covenant (Ex 18:13-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Giving of the Law at Sinai<\/h5>\n<p>God had kept his promises to Moses. He had delivered the Hebrews from their Egyptian bondage and brought them to the very place where he had commissioned Moses to be their leader. He was now ready to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel. Amid a spectacular and terrifying scene of lightning, thunder, thick clouds, fire, smoke, and earthquake, God descended to the top of Sinai and called Moses to come up the mountain, where he remained 40 days to receive the law that would become the basis of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God was revealed as the God who demands exclusive allegiance in all areas of life and, at the same time, as the God who desires personal fellowship with his people.<\/p>\n<h5>Apostasy of the People<\/h5>\n<p>While Moses tarried on Mt Sinai, the people below became impatient and skeptical about his return, so they went to Aaron and asked him to make idols for them to worship. They contributed the gold earrings they were wearing. “Then Aaron took the gold, melted it down, and molded and tooled it into the shape of a calf. The people exclaimed, ‘O Israel, these are the gods who brought you out of Egypt!’ ” (Ex 32:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The next day they joined in the worship of the idol with sacrifices and revelry. God told Moses what was taking place below and angrily declared that he was going to destroy the people but would make a great nation of Moses and his descendants. Moses immediately interceded on behalf of the people, and God’s wrath abated. Moses descended the mountain, carrying the two tablets of stone on which the law had been written, but when he entered the camp and saw what was taking place, he could not restrain his anger. He threw the stone tablets to the ground, ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water, and forced the people to drink it. He turned angrily to Aaron and demanded an explanation for the great sin that had been committed. Aaron lamely tried to shift the blame by minimizing his own role: “I threw them [the gold] into the fire—and out came this calf!” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses called for volunteers to carry out God’s judgment on the people for the great sin they had committed. Men of the tribe of Levi responded and executed about 3,000 men. Later they were commended and rewarded (Dt 33:9-10). Moses again interceded for the people, requesting that he be destroyed with the rest if God could not forgive them. God relented and promised Moses that the angel of the Lord would go with them still (Ex 32:34).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses made a special request that he might be allowed to see the glory of the Lord. God instructed Moses to hew out two more tablets of stone like the ones he had destroyed and to return to the top of the mountain the next day. There the Lord passed before him and proclaimed his name: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, the merciful and gracious God. I am slow to anger and rich in unfailing love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses remained on the mountain another 40 days, where he received renewed warnings against idolatry and further instructions from the Lord, together with another copy of the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. When Moses came down from the mountain, he was not aware that the skin of his face shone as a result of talking with God. At first the people were afraid to come near him, but he called them together and repeated all the Lord had said to him on the mountain. Afterward, he covered his face with a veil, which he removed only when he went into the presence of the Lord. Paul said the purpose of the veil was to prevent the people from seeing the heavenly light gradually fade from Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Tabernacle and Establishment of the Priesthood<\/h5>\n<p>When Moses went up to the mountain the first time to receive the law from God, he was instructed to collect materials to be used in the construction of the tabernacle or tent. Gold, silver, bronze, blue and purple and scarlet yarn, fine twined linen, goats’ hair, tanned rams’ skins, goatskins, and acacia wood would be needed, along with oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for setting (Ex 25:3-7). The pattern for construction was also given to him, together with the ritual to be used for the consecration of the priests. A man named Bezalel was put in charge of the construction of the tabernacle, assisted by Oholiab (31:1-6). The tabernacle was portable like a tent so that it could be taken down and moved from place to place as the Hebrews continued their journey toward Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to giving Moses directions for the tabernacle, God also instructed him concerning the sacrifices that were to be brought: the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering (Lv 1–7). The solemn ceremony for ordaining Aaron and his sons as priests and for inaugurating the worship practices were to be performed by Moses (chs 8–9).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after this solemn inauguration of the religious ritual actually took place, Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s four sons, offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. A fire came out from the Lord and destroyed them. Moses forbade Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar to express grief because of the sinfulness of the act (Lv 10:1-7). The nature of their sin is difficult to determine, but it surely involved a violation of God’s holiness. Therefore, it is appropriate that a large part of the remainder of the book of Leviticus gives regulations that stress the holy living that God expected from his people.<\/p>\n<h5>From Sinai to Kadesh<\/h5>\n<p>A year had elapsed from the time the Israelites left Egypt until the census was taken (Nm 9:1). God reminded the people that it was time to observe the Passover, which they did, and a month later they set out from Sinai and came to the wilderness of Paran. Along the way they complained about the unvarying diet of manna and they longed for the fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic they had eaten in Egypt (11:4-6). In anger God sent quail in abundance, but even while the people were devouring the meat, God sent a great plague that killed many Israelites. The complaining attitude of the people was shared even by Miriam and Aaron. They began to speak against the Cushite woman Moses had married (12:1-2). It is not certain whether the Cushite was an Ethiopian or whether this was another way of referring to Zipporah. If Moses did marry a second time, no mention is made of it elsewhere in the OT. Moses made no reply to the accusations of his brother and sister. It was not necessary, for God intervened in defense of his servant. He smote Miriam with leprosy for her part in speaking against Moses, and when Aaron saw what had happened to Miriam, he acknowledged that they both had sinned. Miriam’s leprosy was removed in response to Moses’ fervent intercession.<\/p>\n\n<p>While the people were encamped at Kadesh (also called Kadesh-barnea—Nm 32:8) in the wilderness of Paran, Moses sent 12 men into Canaan, one from each tribe, to spy out the land in preparation for the Israelite entry. After 40 days the spies returned and, though they acknowledged that the land was fertile and inviting, 10 of them were afraid of the Canaanite inhabitants and advised against going into the land. Only Joshua and Caleb were willing to go ahead and occupy the territory. The entire congregation joined the protest against going in and determined to choose a new leader and return to Egypt rather than risk death by the sword in Canaan. They threatened to stone Moses and Aaron. At that moment God intervened and would have destroyed all the people on the spot except for the intervention of Moses (13:1–14:19). He declared that, if God did not bring the people into Canaan, the nations round about would conclude that the God of the Israelites was unable to bring them into the land. Once again God acquiesced to Moses’ request to pardon the people but said that none of them 20 years and older who had complained against him would be allowed to enter the land. All the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation died, and then their children would be allowed to enter Canaan (14:29-33). When they heard the Lord’s sentence upon them, the people quickly decided to lift the sentence of judgment by entering the land at once, but God was not with them, and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<h5>Forty Years in the Wilderness<\/h5>\n<p>Very little is known about events during the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. In spite of the judgment that had already come upon them, the people did not seem to change their ways. A man named Korah led another rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron. God would not listen to the pleas of Moses and Aaron on behalf of these dissidents (Nm 16:22-24), but told the congregation to separate itself from the tents of Korah and his conspirators. While the people watched, the ground split open and swallowed up the rebellious factions together with their households and all their possessions. Though the rest of the Israelites witnessed the fate of the rebels, it did not deter them from again turning on Moses and Aaron. At this, God told Moses to remove himself from the murmuring congregation in order that he could take vengeance. Though Moses offered atonement for the people’s sins, 14,700 died by plague before the punishment was ended. To demonstrate further to the people that Moses was his chosen leader, the Lord instructed Moses to take rods, one for each tribe, and to deposit them in the tent of meeting. God would cause the rod of the man chosen by him to sprout, and so silence the murmurings of the people. The rod belonging to Aaron sprouted and budded and bloomed, but the people only complained more.<\/p>\n<p>As the people neared the end of their years of wilderness wanderings, Miriam died in Kadesh and was buried there (Nm 20:1). Soon after, the people began to complain once more for lack of water. God instructed Moses to speak to a rock that would bring forth water to satisfy the needs of the people. Instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it twice with his rod. The water came forth, but God rebuked Moses and Aaron: “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel, you will not lead them into the land I am giving them!” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nature of the sin is not clear, but Moses and Aaron were apparently taking to themselves honor that belonged to God alone. Because of the sin, they were denied the privilege of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. The punishment may seem too severe for the sin, but it shows that the privileged role of leadership given to Moses and Aaron carried with it an unusual measure of responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The people then journeyed from Kadesh to Mt Hor on the border of the land of Edom, where Aaron died. Moses took his priestly garments from him and gave them to Eleazar, his son, thereby transferring the priestly office (Nm 20:28).<\/p>\n<p>As the people came closer to their destination, resistance on the part of the native population increased. There was a skirmish with the king of Arad and his forces at Hormah, resulting in a victory for Israel (Nm 21:1-3). As they journeyed around Edom, some of the Israelites began speaking against God and Moses because there was no food or water and they were tired of eating manna. This time the Lord sent poisonous snakes among the people, and many of them died of the venomous bites. Those who had not yet been bitten came to Moses, acknowledged their sin, and asked that the serpents be removed from their midst. God instructed Moses to make a serpent of bronze and set it on a pole. If a person bitten by a serpent looked up at the bronze serpent, he or she would live.<\/p>\n<p>As the Israelites approached the territory of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they sent messengers asking permission to pass peaceably through his land. Instead of granting the request, Sihon gathered his army together and fought against Israel. He was killed in the battle, and his land and cities were taken and occupied by the Hebrews (Nm 21:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Arrival at the Jordan River<\/h5>\n<p>After their victory over Sihon, the Israelites set out again and encamped in the plains of Moab on the east side of the Jordan River facing Jericho, in full view of the Promised Land. The Moabites were terrified by the presence of these people because they had heard what happened to the Amorites. Their king, Balak, hired a magician named Balaam to curse the Israelites. Three times Balaam attempted to curse them, but each time God turned his words into a blessing (Nm 22–24). Though unable to curse the Israelites, Balaam was responsible for an even greater calamity. He advised the Moabites to entice the Israelites to sacrifice to their gods and bow down to them (Nm 25:1-3; 31:16; 2 Pt 2:15; Rv 2:14). While the people were worshiping the Moabite deity, Baal of Peor, God’s anger was kindled against them, and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 of them (Nm 25:9). It was Israel’s first encounter with the seductive allurement of licentious idolatry and an ominous foreview of what would happen after they settled down in Canaan. Their continued attraction to idolatry would be their final undoing.<\/p>\n<p>After the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar to take another census of the people like the one almost 40 years earlier. A whole generation of Israelites had died in the wilderness, but they had been replaced by an almost equal number, so that now there were 601,730 men 20 years and older who were able to go to war (Nm 26:51). Not a man remained of those who had been counted in the first census, except Caleb and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses to lay hands on Joshua and commission him as the new leader in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation (Nm 27:12-23). In addition, the Lord gave Moses instructions concerning feasts and offerings and vows (chs 28–30). God ordered Moses, as his last act as leader, to avenge the Israelites on the Midianites. In that battle the armies of Israel gained a great victory over the Midianites, killing their kings, their men, and also Balaam.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave instructions to Moses concerning the boundaries that would mark the Promised Land and named the men who would divide the land among the tribes (Nm 34). He also ordered that 48 cities be given to the Levites, the priestly tribe, as their portion. Six of these were designated as cities of refuge where murderers could flee so that they would not be killed by those seeking vengeance without having an opportunity to stand before the congregation for judgment (ch 35).<\/p>\n<h5>Moses’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy has often been called Moses’ valedictory speech to the people, for in it Moses is not merely the chief speaker but the only speaker. With the congregation of his people gathered before him, he rehearsed all that God had done for them since leaving Sinai, and he reminded them of their failure to enter the Promised Land 38 years earlier (Dt 2:14). He recalled his plea that God would let him cross the Jordan and see the land that was to be the home of the people, but God responded that Moses would only be allowed to view the land from the top of Pisgah. Moses then exhorted the people to obey the statutes and ordinances that had been given to them in order to experience God’s blessings in the land.<\/p>\n\n<p>As the day of Moses’ death approached, the Lord ordered Moses and Joshua to present themselves at the tent of meeting in order for Joshua to be commissioned as the new leader (Dt 31:14-23). Before his death, Moses pronounced a blessing upon all the Israelites (ch 33). Having completed these tasks, Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mt Nebo, and to the top of Pisgah. From there God showed him the land promised long ago to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the land that was soon to be the home of the wandering Israelite tribes. Again God told him that he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan. Moses died there and God buried him somewhere in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor (34:6). Moses was 120 years old when he died, and the Israelites mourned his death for 30 days. The finest tribute to Moses is found in the closing words of the book of Deuteronomy, “There has never been another prophet like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (v 10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MosesintheNewTestament\">Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>All Jews and Christians in apostolic times considered Moses the author of the Pentateuch. Such expressions as “the law of Moses” (Lk 2:22), “Moses commanded” (Mt 19:7), “Moses said” (Mk 7:10) “and Moses wrote” (12:19) shows that his name was synonymous with the OT books attributed to him. He is mentioned in the NT more than any other OT figure, a total of 79 times. His role as lawgiver is emphasized more than any other aspect of his life (Mt 8:4; Mk 7:10; Jn 1:17; Acts 15:1). He appears at the transfiguration of Jesus as the representative of OT law, along with Elijah as the representative of OT prophets (Mt 17:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ role as prophet is also mentioned in the NT. As a prophet, he spoke of the coming Messiah and his sufferings (Lk 24:25-27; Acts 3:22). The NT also draws from the life and experiences of Moses to show patterns of life under the new covenant. The nativity story of Jesus parallels the Mosaic story of the infant deliverer being rescued from the evil designs of an earthly despot (Mt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount parallels the giving of the law at Sinai (Mt 5–7) and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the will of God. Contrast between the old law and the new relationship with God is especially marked in the book of Galatians. The comparison of Moses with Christ is an important emphasis of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:5-6; 9:11-22). John contrasted the law that was given through Moses with the grace and truth that came through Jesus Christ (Jn 1:17). He also contrasted the manna in the wilderness to Jesus as “the bread of life” (6:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Other references to Moses or to events associated with him include his birth (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23), the burning bush (Lk 20:37), the magicians of Egypt (2 Tm 3:8), the Passover (Heb 11:28), the exodus (3:16), crossing of the sea (1 Cor 10:2), the covenant sacrifice at Sinai (Mt 26:28), the manna (1 Cor 10:3), the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:7-18), water from the rock (1 Cor 10:4), the bronze serpent (Jn 3:14), and the song of Moses (Rv 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Plagues upon Egypt; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MOSES<\/h3>\n<p>Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:17; Ps 18:16). If, however, it is an Egyptian name given him by the daughter of Pharaoh who found him, it is more likely from an Egyptian word for “son” (also found as part of many well-known Egyptian names such as Ahmose, Thutmose, and Ramses). No one else in the OT bears this name.<\/p>\n<p>Without question, the greatest figure in the OT (mentioned by name 767 times), his influence also extends to the pages of the NT (where he is mentioned 79 times). The first 40 years of his life were spent in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), where he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. The next 40 years he spent in Midian as a fugitive from the wrath of Pharaoh, after killing an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. His last 40 years were devoted to leading the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt to the land God had promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gn 12:1-3). He died at the age of 120 after leading the Israelites successfully through 40 years of wandering in the wilderness to the very edge of the Promised Land on the east side of the Jordan River (Dt 34:7). He is one of the great figures in all of history, a man who took a group of slaves and, under inconceivably difficult circumstances, molded them into a nation that has influenced and altered the entire course of history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<p>• The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<p>• Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The only source of information for the life of Moses is the Bible. Archaeology confirms the credibility of the events associated with Moses, but it has never provided any specific confirmation of his existence or work. His story begins with the arrival in Egypt of Jacob, his sons, and their families during a time of famine in Canaan. Invited by Joseph and welcomed by Pharaoh, the family settled down in northeast Egypt in an area known as Goshen, where they remained for 430 years (Ex 12:40). With the passing of time, their numbers grew rapidly, so that the land was filled with them (1:7). A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph. The biblical account does not give the name of this pharaoh, and there has never been agreement as to his identity. He has most frequently been identified as Thutmose III (1504–1451 <span>BC<\/span>), Seti I (1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>), or Ramses II (1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). Out of fear that their growing numbers might become a threat to the security of his nation, Pharaoh determined to take measures to reduce their number. He put them to work building the store cities of Pithom and Rameses, but the severity of the work did not diminish them. He next tried to enlist the cooperation of the midwives to destroy the male babies, but they would not carry out his orders. He then ordered his own people to drown the male infants in the Nile River. Against the background of this first-known Jewish persecution, the baby Moses was born.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFirst40YearsInEgypt\">The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<h5>Birth and Early Life<\/h5>\n<p>A man of the family of Levi named Amram married his father’s sister Jochebed (Ex 6:20; cf. 2:1). Their first son, Aaron, three years older than Moses, was born before the command to drown the Hebrew babies was given, as there is no indication that his life was in danger. However, the cruel order was in force when Moses was born, and after three months, when his mother could no longer hide him, she took a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the baby into the basket and placed it among the reeds along the banks of the river. An older sister, Miriam, stayed near the river to see what would happen. Soon the daughter of Pharaoh (identified by Josephus as Thermuthis and by others as Hatshepsut, but whose actual identity cannot be determined) came to the river to bathe, as was her custom. She discovered the baby, recognized it as one of the Hebrew children, and determined that she would raise the child as her own. Miriam emerged from her hiding place and offered to secure a Hebrew woman to nurse the child, an arrangement that was agreeable to the princess. Miriam took the baby to his own mother, who kept him for perhaps two or three years (cf. 1 Sm 1:19-24). Nothing is recorded of those formative years. Whether his mother continued seeing him during his later childhood and young manhood or revealed his true identity to him or taught him the Hebrew faith are matters of speculation. Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, as would befit a member of the royal household, and he became mighty in his words and deeds (Acts 7:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Identification with His Own People<\/h5>\n<p>Just when Moses became aware that he was a Hebrew rather than Egyptian cannot be known, but it is clear that he knew it by the time he was 40 years old. One day he went out to visit his people and to observe their treatment, for the cruel measures taken against them by Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ birth had not been lifted. Seeing an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses in great anger killed the Egyptian and buried him. He thought the deed had gone unnoticed until the next day when he encountered two Hebrews fighting with each other. When he tried to act as peacemaker, they both turned on him and accused him of murder: “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” (Ex 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). Acts 7:25 adds: “He supposed that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Aware that being a member of Pharaoh’s household would not exempt him from punishment now that the deed was known, Moses fled for his life to the land of Midian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSecond40YearsInMidian\">The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<h5>Marriage into the Family of Jethro<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after arriving in Midian, Moses sat down by a well, where he observed the seven daughters of the priest of Midian who had come to the well to draw water for their father’s flock. Shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses intervened and helped them water their animals. When Jethro (Ex 3:1; also called Reuel, 2:18; Hobab, Nm 10:29) learned what had happened, he invited Moses to stay with his family and gave him Zipporah as his wife. (There is some disagreement among scholars regarding the identity of Hobab in Numbers 10:29; some think he was Moses’ father-in-law, while others maintain that Hobab was Moses’ brother-in-law. <em>See also<\/em> Hobab). Two children, Gershom (Ex 2:22) and Eliezer (18:4), were born to Moses and Zipporah during the years in Midian. Forty years passed, and Moses’ thoughts about his former life in Egypt must have faded into the past. He could not have foreseen that God would soon thrust him back into the midst of the court in Egypt, where he would confront the son of the now-dead pharaoh with the demand to release the Hebrew people from the bondage they had endured for so many years. God had not forgotten his people and was now ready to deliver them.<\/p>\n<h5>Encounter with God at the Burning Bush<\/h5>\n<p>One day, while Moses was taking care of the flocks of his father-in-law, he led them to Mt Horeb (known also as Sinai), where God appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush that burned but was not consumed. Moses approached to observe the strange sight more closely and heard God speak to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” Moses replied, “Here am I.” Before he could come any nearer to the bush, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). He further identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He assured Moses that he was aware of the cruel afflictions of his people and had heard their cries. Then he told of his plan to send Moses to Egypt to deliver his people from their bondage.<\/p>\n<p>Faced with a challenge that seemed beyond his capabilities, the aged Moses began making excuses for not accepting the task. God assured Moses that he would be with him (Ex 3:11-12). To his excuse that he would not be able to give an answer if the people asked him the name of the God he represented, God revealed his name in the cryptic statement, “ ‘<span>I Am the One Who Always Is<\/span>’ . . . Just tell them, ‘I <span>Am<\/span> has sent me to you’ ” (vv 13-14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many interpretations have been proposed for the name. Whatever else it means, it undoubtedly suggests the self-existence and all-sufficiency of God. Moses then argued that the people would not believe him when he told them that God had sent him to deliver them from Egypt. In response God gave him three signs: When he cast his shepherd’s rod to the ground, it became a serpent. When he put his hand to his bosom, it became leprous. He was also told that when he would pour water from the Nile on the ground, it would become blood (Ex 4:1-9). Even armed with these powerful evidences of the presence of God with him, Moses raised still another objection, “O Lord, I’m just not a good speaker. I never have been, and I’m not now, even after you have spoken to me. I’m clumsy with words” (v 10, <span>nlt<\/span>). God told him that he would teach him what to say, but despite such assurance, Moses asked God to send someone else. In anger mingled with compassion, God made Moses’ brother, Aaron, the spokesman, but said his instructions would still be given directly to Moses.<\/p>\n<h5>Return to Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>Moses took his wife and sons and set out for Egypt, telling his father-in-law only that he wanted to go back to Egypt to visit his kinsmen there (Ex 4:18). The biblical account says he put his wife and sons on the same donkey to journey back to Egypt (v 20). The fact that all three rode the same animal indicates that both children were quite young and had not been born in the early years of Moses’ marriage. At a lodging place along the way a strange thing happened. The Lord met him and sought to kill him (v 24), apparently because Moses had failed to circumcise the baby before leaving Midian. When Zipporah realized that Moses’ life was in danger, she performed the rite herself and said to her husband, “What a blood-smeared bridegroom you are to me!” (v 25, <span>nlt<\/span>). Whatever else may have been involved in this unusual encounter with God, it was a solemn reminder that the one who was to be the leader of the covenant people must not himself neglect any part of the covenant (Gn 17:10-14).<\/p>\n<p>God told Aaron (who was still in Egypt) to go to the mountain where Moses had encountered God at the burning bush and meet his brother there. Moses told Aaron everything that had happened, and together they went to Egypt, gathered the elders together, and informed them of these matters. When Moses and Aaron performed the signs in the presence of the people, they believed these leaders had been sent by God to deliver them from their affliction (Ex 4:30-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheThird40YearsFromEgypttoCanaan\">The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<h5>The Encounter with Pharaoh<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after his return to Egypt, Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went to Pharaoh and repeated the demands of the Lord, “Let my people go, for they must go out into the wilderness to hold a religious festival in my honor” (Ex 5:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Pharaoh rejected the demand with the observation that he had never heard of this God of Moses. When one realizes that Egyptian kings considered themselves to be gods, the affront to Pharaoh becomes even more acute. Not only did he reject Moses’ demands, but he intensified the burdens of the Hebrews. Their work had up until then required them to make brick using straw provided for them, but now Pharaoh said they would have to gather their own straw and still produce the same number of bricks. The Hebrews turned in anguish and anger to Moses and blamed him for making them offensive in the sight of Pharaoh. Even Moses could not understand the turn of events and complained bitterly to God. God reassured Moses that he would deliver the Hebrews from their bondage, and moreover, he would bring them into the land he had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He then instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and repeat the demand to release the Hebrews upon threat of severe reprisal if the demand were ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Ushered again into Pharaoh’s presence, Moses repeated his request for release of the Israelites. He attempted to impress Pharaoh by turning his rod into a serpent, but the Egyptian wise men, through their secret arts, were able to duplicate the miracle, so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened and he would not listen to Moses. In rapid succession Moses brought nine plagues upon the land of Egypt to show the omnipotence of God to force the compliance of Pharaoh. These included a plague in which the water of the Nile turned to blood, a plague of frogs, one of gnats, then of flies, a plague on the livestock, boils on the people, plagues of hail, locusts, and complete darkness. During the plagues of the frogs, flies, hail, locusts, and darkness, Pharaoh was distraught and would temporarily relent and agree to Moses’ demands, but as soon as the plague was lifted, his heart hardened and he would retract his promise. The outcome of the first nine plagues was terrible devastation of the land of Egypt, but the Israelites were not released. There was yet one more plague in store, the most terrible of all.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Passover<\/h5>\n<p>God told Moses that there remained one more plague in store for the Egyptians: “All the firstborn sons will die in every family in Egypt, from the oldest son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the oldest son of his lowliest slave. Even the firstborn of the animals will die” (Ex 11:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Furthermore, he assured Moses that the plague would not touch a single household of the Hebrews, “Then you will know that the <span>Lord<\/span> makes a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites” (v 7, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed the people through Moses and Aaron to make their preparations for leaving the land in haste. They were to go to the Egyptians and ask them for their jewels of silver and gold (Ex 11:2-3), a request to which the Egyptians agreed, perhaps out of fear of the Hebrews and in the belief that the gifts would bring about an end of the terrors that had struck the land. The Hebrews were also instructed to prepare a lamb for each family—small families could share—for the last meal to be eaten in the land of Egypt (a rite that became the pattern for the Jewish observance of the Passover for many centuries). Blood of the lamb was to be put on the doorposts and lintels of the houses in which the Passover meal was being eaten that night. The Hebrews were promised that wherever the blood was on the door, no harm would come to that household. They were also instructed to prepare unleavened bread. At midnight the death angel of the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh himself to the lowest captive in a dungeon; not a single house of the Egyptians escaped tragedy. When Pharaoh saw what had happened, he ordered Moses and the people to leave the land at once (12:31-32). The biblical record says that about 600,000 Hebrew men left Egypt. Together with women and children, the total would have been in excess of 2 million people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Exodus from Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The exodus is the central event of the OT and marks the birth of Israel as a nation. The Jewish people still look back to that event as the great redemptive act of God in history on behalf of his people, much as Christians look upon the cross as the great redemptive act of their faith.<\/p>\n\n<p>The exact route taken by the Hebrews out of Egypt cannot be determined today, though many possibilities have been proposed. They did not take the shortest, most direct route to Canaan (which would have been about a 10 days’ journey along the Mediterranean coastline), but set out in the direction of Mt Sinai, where Moses had earlier met God at the burning bush. As a sign that Moses had been sent to deliver the people, God told Moses he would bring them to that same spot, where they would worship God (Ex 3:12). The Hebrews did not forget the request of Joseph to carry his bones with them when they returned to their own land (Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19).<\/p>\n<p>As the people journeyed, they were preceded by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night. The cloud represented the presence of God with his people and guided them along the route they should travel.<\/p>\n<p>Back in Egypt, Pharaoh was having second thoughts about letting the Hebrews leave the land and decided to pursue them with his army and bring them back. When the Hebrews saw the approaching cloud of dust and realized that the Egyptian army was pursuing them, they were terrified. The sea lay ahead of them and the Egyptians were behind; there seemed to be no way of escape. The people turned on Moses, blaming him for bringing them out of Egypt. God again assured them that they did not need to be afraid or do anything to defend themselves. He promised to fight the battle for them and give them victory (Ex 14:14).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord parted the water of the Sea of Reeds (traditionally but erroneously referred to as the Red Sea) by a strong east wind and allowed the Israelites to pass through the sea on dry ground to the other side. The Egyptians rushed after the Israelites, following them into the dry bed of the sea. But before they reached the other side, the waters rushed back together, destroying the Egyptian army in the midst of the sea and leaving the Israelites safe on the other side. The people celebrated their great deliverance in song (Ex 15) and then continued their journey. The narrative that follows describes the struggle of the Israelites to survive in the desert—problems of food and water, internal dissension, murmurings against Moses, and battles with enemies. Through all their experiences, Moses towers as the unifying force and great spiritual leader.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of having seen God’s great act of deliverance so recently, the faith of the Israelites was not strong. Three days later they came to a place where the water was not fit to drink, and they began complaining against Moses. The Lord showed Moses how to purify the water, and the people’s needs were satisfied (Ex 15:22-25). When they reached the wilderness of Sin, they complained again, this time because of lack of food. God met their need by supplying manna, a breadlike substance that would serve as their food until they came to Canaan (16:1-21). Later, camped at Rephidim, the people complained again, this time for lack of water. Once again God met their needs by supplying water from the rock at Horeb (17:1-7). The Amalekites attacked them while they were still camped at Rephidim, but God gave a great victory to the Israelites (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the people reached Sinai and camped there. Jethro came to visit, bringing Moses’ wife and sons. Zipporah had apparently decided to return with her children to stay with her father rather than to go on to Egypt with Moses. It was a joyful reunion, and Jethro made a burnt offering and sacrifices to God (an act that has evoked the suggestion that Jethro was a true worshiper of God, though nothing is known of his links to the Hebrew faith). When Jethro observed Moses trying to settle all the disputes and problems of the Hebrews unaided, he proposed that Moses delegate responsibility for some of the lesser matters to able men chosen from among the people. Moses accepted the suggestion, and shortly afterward Jethro returned to his own land. He did not remain at Sinai to participate in the ratification of the covenant (Ex 18:13-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Giving of the Law at Sinai<\/h5>\n<p>God had kept his promises to Moses. He had delivered the Hebrews from their Egyptian bondage and brought them to the very place where he had commissioned Moses to be their leader. He was now ready to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel. Amid a spectacular and terrifying scene of lightning, thunder, thick clouds, fire, smoke, and earthquake, God descended to the top of Sinai and called Moses to come up the mountain, where he remained 40 days to receive the law that would become the basis of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God was revealed as the God who demands exclusive allegiance in all areas of life and, at the same time, as the God who desires personal fellowship with his people.<\/p>\n<h5>Apostasy of the People<\/h5>\n<p>While Moses tarried on Mt Sinai, the people below became impatient and skeptical about his return, so they went to Aaron and asked him to make idols for them to worship. They contributed the gold earrings they were wearing. “Then Aaron took the gold, melted it down, and molded and tooled it into the shape of a calf. The people exclaimed, ‘O Israel, these are the gods who brought you out of Egypt!’ ” (Ex 32:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The next day they joined in the worship of the idol with sacrifices and revelry. God told Moses what was taking place below and angrily declared that he was going to destroy the people but would make a great nation of Moses and his descendants. Moses immediately interceded on behalf of the people, and God’s wrath abated. Moses descended the mountain, carrying the two tablets of stone on which the law had been written, but when he entered the camp and saw what was taking place, he could not restrain his anger. He threw the stone tablets to the ground, ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water, and forced the people to drink it. He turned angrily to Aaron and demanded an explanation for the great sin that had been committed. Aaron lamely tried to shift the blame by minimizing his own role: “I threw them [the gold] into the fire—and out came this calf!” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses called for volunteers to carry out God’s judgment on the people for the great sin they had committed. Men of the tribe of Levi responded and executed about 3,000 men. Later they were commended and rewarded (Dt 33:9-10). Moses again interceded for the people, requesting that he be destroyed with the rest if God could not forgive them. God relented and promised Moses that the angel of the Lord would go with them still (Ex 32:34).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses made a special request that he might be allowed to see the glory of the Lord. God instructed Moses to hew out two more tablets of stone like the ones he had destroyed and to return to the top of the mountain the next day. There the Lord passed before him and proclaimed his name: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, the merciful and gracious God. I am slow to anger and rich in unfailing love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses remained on the mountain another 40 days, where he received renewed warnings against idolatry and further instructions from the Lord, together with another copy of the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. When Moses came down from the mountain, he was not aware that the skin of his face shone as a result of talking with God. At first the people were afraid to come near him, but he called them together and repeated all the Lord had said to him on the mountain. Afterward, he covered his face with a veil, which he removed only when he went into the presence of the Lord. Paul said the purpose of the veil was to prevent the people from seeing the heavenly light gradually fade from Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Tabernacle and Establishment of the Priesthood<\/h5>\n<p>When Moses went up to the mountain the first time to receive the law from God, he was instructed to collect materials to be used in the construction of the tabernacle or tent. Gold, silver, bronze, blue and purple and scarlet yarn, fine twined linen, goats’ hair, tanned rams’ skins, goatskins, and acacia wood would be needed, along with oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for setting (Ex 25:3-7). The pattern for construction was also given to him, together with the ritual to be used for the consecration of the priests. A man named Bezalel was put in charge of the construction of the tabernacle, assisted by Oholiab (31:1-6). The tabernacle was portable like a tent so that it could be taken down and moved from place to place as the Hebrews continued their journey toward Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to giving Moses directions for the tabernacle, God also instructed him concerning the sacrifices that were to be brought: the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering (Lv 1–7). The solemn ceremony for ordaining Aaron and his sons as priests and for inaugurating the worship practices were to be performed by Moses (chs 8–9).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after this solemn inauguration of the religious ritual actually took place, Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s four sons, offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. A fire came out from the Lord and destroyed them. Moses forbade Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar to express grief because of the sinfulness of the act (Lv 10:1-7). The nature of their sin is difficult to determine, but it surely involved a violation of God’s holiness. Therefore, it is appropriate that a large part of the remainder of the book of Leviticus gives regulations that stress the holy living that God expected from his people.<\/p>\n<h5>From Sinai to Kadesh<\/h5>\n<p>A year had elapsed from the time the Israelites left Egypt until the census was taken (Nm 9:1). God reminded the people that it was time to observe the Passover, which they did, and a month later they set out from Sinai and came to the wilderness of Paran. Along the way they complained about the unvarying diet of manna and they longed for the fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic they had eaten in Egypt (11:4-6). In anger God sent quail in abundance, but even while the people were devouring the meat, God sent a great plague that killed many Israelites. The complaining attitude of the people was shared even by Miriam and Aaron. They began to speak against the Cushite woman Moses had married (12:1-2). It is not certain whether the Cushite was an Ethiopian or whether this was another way of referring to Zipporah. If Moses did marry a second time, no mention is made of it elsewhere in the OT. Moses made no reply to the accusations of his brother and sister. It was not necessary, for God intervened in defense of his servant. He smote Miriam with leprosy for her part in speaking against Moses, and when Aaron saw what had happened to Miriam, he acknowledged that they both had sinned. Miriam’s leprosy was removed in response to Moses’ fervent intercession.<\/p>\n\n<p>While the people were encamped at Kadesh (also called Kadesh-barnea—Nm 32:8) in the wilderness of Paran, Moses sent 12 men into Canaan, one from each tribe, to spy out the land in preparation for the Israelite entry. After 40 days the spies returned and, though they acknowledged that the land was fertile and inviting, 10 of them were afraid of the Canaanite inhabitants and advised against going into the land. Only Joshua and Caleb were willing to go ahead and occupy the territory. The entire congregation joined the protest against going in and determined to choose a new leader and return to Egypt rather than risk death by the sword in Canaan. They threatened to stone Moses and Aaron. At that moment God intervened and would have destroyed all the people on the spot except for the intervention of Moses (13:1–14:19). He declared that, if God did not bring the people into Canaan, the nations round about would conclude that the God of the Israelites was unable to bring them into the land. Once again God acquiesced to Moses’ request to pardon the people but said that none of them 20 years and older who had complained against him would be allowed to enter the land. All the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation died, and then their children would be allowed to enter Canaan (14:29-33). When they heard the Lord’s sentence upon them, the people quickly decided to lift the sentence of judgment by entering the land at once, but God was not with them, and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<h5>Forty Years in the Wilderness<\/h5>\n<p>Very little is known about events during the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. In spite of the judgment that had already come upon them, the people did not seem to change their ways. A man named Korah led another rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron. God would not listen to the pleas of Moses and Aaron on behalf of these dissidents (Nm 16:22-24), but told the congregation to separate itself from the tents of Korah and his conspirators. While the people watched, the ground split open and swallowed up the rebellious factions together with their households and all their possessions. Though the rest of the Israelites witnessed the fate of the rebels, it did not deter them from again turning on Moses and Aaron. At this, God told Moses to remove himself from the murmuring congregation in order that he could take vengeance. Though Moses offered atonement for the people’s sins, 14,700 died by plague before the punishment was ended. To demonstrate further to the people that Moses was his chosen leader, the Lord instructed Moses to take rods, one for each tribe, and to deposit them in the tent of meeting. God would cause the rod of the man chosen by him to sprout, and so silence the murmurings of the people. The rod belonging to Aaron sprouted and budded and bloomed, but the people only complained more.<\/p>\n<p>As the people neared the end of their years of wilderness wanderings, Miriam died in Kadesh and was buried there (Nm 20:1). Soon after, the people began to complain once more for lack of water. God instructed Moses to speak to a rock that would bring forth water to satisfy the needs of the people. Instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it twice with his rod. The water came forth, but God rebuked Moses and Aaron: “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel, you will not lead them into the land I am giving them!” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nature of the sin is not clear, but Moses and Aaron were apparently taking to themselves honor that belonged to God alone. Because of the sin, they were denied the privilege of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. The punishment may seem too severe for the sin, but it shows that the privileged role of leadership given to Moses and Aaron carried with it an unusual measure of responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The people then journeyed from Kadesh to Mt Hor on the border of the land of Edom, where Aaron died. Moses took his priestly garments from him and gave them to Eleazar, his son, thereby transferring the priestly office (Nm 20:28).<\/p>\n<p>As the people came closer to their destination, resistance on the part of the native population increased. There was a skirmish with the king of Arad and his forces at Hormah, resulting in a victory for Israel (Nm 21:1-3). As they journeyed around Edom, some of the Israelites began speaking against God and Moses because there was no food or water and they were tired of eating manna. This time the Lord sent poisonous snakes among the people, and many of them died of the venomous bites. Those who had not yet been bitten came to Moses, acknowledged their sin, and asked that the serpents be removed from their midst. God instructed Moses to make a serpent of bronze and set it on a pole. If a person bitten by a serpent looked up at the bronze serpent, he or she would live.<\/p>\n<p>As the Israelites approached the territory of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they sent messengers asking permission to pass peaceably through his land. Instead of granting the request, Sihon gathered his army together and fought against Israel. He was killed in the battle, and his land and cities were taken and occupied by the Hebrews (Nm 21:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Arrival at the Jordan River<\/h5>\n<p>After their victory over Sihon, the Israelites set out again and encamped in the plains of Moab on the east side of the Jordan River facing Jericho, in full view of the Promised Land. The Moabites were terrified by the presence of these people because they had heard what happened to the Amorites. Their king, Balak, hired a magician named Balaam to curse the Israelites. Three times Balaam attempted to curse them, but each time God turned his words into a blessing (Nm 22–24). Though unable to curse the Israelites, Balaam was responsible for an even greater calamity. He advised the Moabites to entice the Israelites to sacrifice to their gods and bow down to them (Nm 25:1-3; 31:16; 2 Pt 2:15; Rv 2:14). While the people were worshiping the Moabite deity, Baal of Peor, God’s anger was kindled against them, and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 of them (Nm 25:9). It was Israel’s first encounter with the seductive allurement of licentious idolatry and an ominous foreview of what would happen after they settled down in Canaan. Their continued attraction to idolatry would be their final undoing.<\/p>\n<p>After the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar to take another census of the people like the one almost 40 years earlier. A whole generation of Israelites had died in the wilderness, but they had been replaced by an almost equal number, so that now there were 601,730 men 20 years and older who were able to go to war (Nm 26:51). Not a man remained of those who had been counted in the first census, except Caleb and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses to lay hands on Joshua and commission him as the new leader in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation (Nm 27:12-23). In addition, the Lord gave Moses instructions concerning feasts and offerings and vows (chs 28–30). God ordered Moses, as his last act as leader, to avenge the Israelites on the Midianites. In that battle the armies of Israel gained a great victory over the Midianites, killing their kings, their men, and also Balaam.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave instructions to Moses concerning the boundaries that would mark the Promised Land and named the men who would divide the land among the tribes (Nm 34). He also ordered that 48 cities be given to the Levites, the priestly tribe, as their portion. Six of these were designated as cities of refuge where murderers could flee so that they would not be killed by those seeking vengeance without having an opportunity to stand before the congregation for judgment (ch 35).<\/p>\n<h5>Moses’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy has often been called Moses’ valedictory speech to the people, for in it Moses is not merely the chief speaker but the only speaker. With the congregation of his people gathered before him, he rehearsed all that God had done for them since leaving Sinai, and he reminded them of their failure to enter the Promised Land 38 years earlier (Dt 2:14). He recalled his plea that God would let him cross the Jordan and see the land that was to be the home of the people, but God responded that Moses would only be allowed to view the land from the top of Pisgah. Moses then exhorted the people to obey the statutes and ordinances that had been given to them in order to experience God’s blessings in the land.<\/p>\n\n<p>As the day of Moses’ death approached, the Lord ordered Moses and Joshua to present themselves at the tent of meeting in order for Joshua to be commissioned as the new leader (Dt 31:14-23). Before his death, Moses pronounced a blessing upon all the Israelites (ch 33). Having completed these tasks, Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mt Nebo, and to the top of Pisgah. From there God showed him the land promised long ago to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the land that was soon to be the home of the wandering Israelite tribes. Again God told him that he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan. Moses died there and God buried him somewhere in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor (34:6). Moses was 120 years old when he died, and the Israelites mourned his death for 30 days. The finest tribute to Moses is found in the closing words of the book of Deuteronomy, “There has never been another prophet like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (v 10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MosesintheNewTestament\">Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>All Jews and Christians in apostolic times considered Moses the author of the Pentateuch. Such expressions as “the law of Moses” (Lk 2:22), “Moses commanded” (Mt 19:7), “Moses said” (Mk 7:10) “and Moses wrote” (12:19) shows that his name was synonymous with the OT books attributed to him. He is mentioned in the NT more than any other OT figure, a total of 79 times. His role as lawgiver is emphasized more than any other aspect of his life (Mt 8:4; Mk 7:10; Jn 1:17; Acts 15:1). He appears at the transfiguration of Jesus as the representative of OT law, along with Elijah as the representative of OT prophets (Mt 17:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ role as prophet is also mentioned in the NT. As a prophet, he spoke of the coming Messiah and his sufferings (Lk 24:25-27; Acts 3:22). The NT also draws from the life and experiences of Moses to show patterns of life under the new covenant. The nativity story of Jesus parallels the Mosaic story of the infant deliverer being rescued from the evil designs of an earthly despot (Mt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount parallels the giving of the law at Sinai (Mt 5–7) and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the will of God. Contrast between the old law and the new relationship with God is especially marked in the book of Galatians. The comparison of Moses with Christ is an important emphasis of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:5-6; 9:11-22). John contrasted the law that was given through Moses with the grace and truth that came through Jesus Christ (Jn 1:17). He also contrasted the manna in the wilderness to Jesus as “the bread of life” (6:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Other references to Moses or to events associated with him include his birth (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23), the burning bush (Lk 20:37), the magicians of Egypt (2 Tm 3:8), the Passover (Heb 11:28), the exodus (3:16), crossing of the sea (1 Cor 10:2), the covenant sacrifice at Sinai (Mt 26:28), the manna (1 Cor 10:3), the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:7-18), water from the rock (1 Cor 10:4), the bronze serpent (Jn 3:14), and the song of Moses (Rv 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Plagues upon Egypt; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MOSES Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation. The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:1...","summary_en":"MOSES Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation. The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:1...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27907,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Numbers","title_en":"Book of Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>NUMBERS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, <em>Numeri.<\/em> The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The question of the authorship of Numbers is part of the larger question of the authorship of the Pentateuch. Until the appearance of the higher-critical documentary theories of the 19th century, the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was almost universally held by both Jews and Christians alike. This time-honored tradition is supported by the Pentateuch itself (e.g., Ex 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Nm 33:2; Dt 31:9, 24), the rest of the OT (e.g., Jos 23:6; Jgs 3:4; Mal 4:4), as well as Jesus’ teaching (e.g., Jn 5:46-47), and the rest of the NT (e.g., Acts 28:23; Rom 10:19; 1 Cor 9:9). Although discrepancies in the Pentateuch were widely and openly acknowledged, nevertheless Moses, the 15th-century <span>BC<\/span> lawgiver, was affirmed as the primary author of the Pentateuchal literature.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<h5>Sinai Peninsula<\/h5>\n<p>The historical background of Numbers begins primarily in the geographical region of the Sinai Peninsula of the mid-second millennium <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai Peninsula is in the shape of an inverted triangle with the base on the north. It is approximately 240 miles (386.2 kilometers) long from north to south and 175 miles (281.6 kilometers) wide at the northern base, with an area of approximately 22,000 square miles (56,980 square kilometers). It is bounded on the north by the Mediterranean Sea and the southern border of Canaan, on the west by the Bitter Lakes and the Gulf of Suez, and on the east by the Arabah and the Gulf of Aqaba. Beginning in the north at the Mediterranean coast and moving south, for about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the soil is sandy. South of this coastal plain is a high plateau (Et-Tih) of gravel and limestone (about 2,500 feet, or 762 meters, above sea level), stretching south into the peninsula for approximately 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). Rising above the plateau at this point is a granite mountain formation with peaks up to 8,000 feet (2,438.4 meters) above sea level. In this mountainous region at the apex of the peninsular triangle, Jebel Musa (7,363 feet, or 2,244.2 meters, high), the traditional site where Israel camped before Mt Sinai and Moses received the law, rises above the plain.<\/p>\n<p>The peninsula itself is comprised of five wilderness areas. In the north and immediately east of the land of Goshen is the approximately 40-mile- or 64.4-kilometer-wide wilderness of Shur, which runs past the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) to the region of Kadesh-barnea and northeast to Beersheba. East of this region is the wilderness of Zin, extending east from the wilderness of Shur to the southern tip of the Dead Sea. Kadesh-barnea is located on its southern border (Nm 20:1; 33:36). South of the wilderness of Shur is the wilderness of Etham, and east of this wilderness in the east-central region of Sinai is the great wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19). Kadesh-barnea is on the northern border of this territory (Nm 13:26). In this area the Israelites spent 38 of their 40 years of wandering. Southwest of the wilderness of Paran, on the western slopes of the peninsula, not far from the granite mountains standing in the southern apex of the triangle, is the wilderness of Sin.<\/p>\n<p>While the region is generally desolate and barren, it is not impassable or incapable of sustaining travelers. Wells and springs dot both the western and eastern borders at reasonable distances from each other. The water table is fairly close to ground level, making the digging of wells possible (Nm 20:17; 21:16-18). The limestone rocks are also capable of holding great amounts of water (20:11). Vegetation is sparse except around the more permanent streams where vegetation and date palms flourish. The rainy season in winter is approximately 20 days. Quail (11:31-32) are known to migrate across the peninsula to Europe in the spring.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Peoples Israel Confronted<\/h5>\n<h6>Amalekites and Canaanites (14:25, 43-45; 24:20)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amalekites were descendants of Amalek, son of Eliphaz and grandson of Esau (Gn 36:12, 16). They were generally a nomadic people. In the Sinai Peninsula they were the first to war against Israel at Rephidim (cf. Nm 24:20), perhaps the Wadi Refayid in southwest Sinai (Ex 17:8-16), before Israel reached Horeb. A year later, the Amalekites settled in the hills and valleys north of Kadesh-barnea. In league with the Canaanites, the inhabitants of Palestine, they blocked the effort of Israel to invade the land of promise from the south (Nm 14:45). Israel’s will to wage war appears to have been completely broken for years to come.<\/p>\n<h6>Edomites (20:14-21; 21:4, 10-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Edom, or Seir (24:18), is the territory south of the Dead Sea occupied by Esau’s descendants. Stretching from its northern border at the Wadi Zered (21:12), which flowed into the Dead Sea at its southern tip, 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) south to the Gulf of Aqaba, it occupied both sides of the Arabah, with Kadesh-barnea again standing on the edge of its western border (20:16), giving it a land area of approximately 4,000 square miles (10,360 square kilometers). It is a rugged mountain region with peaks rising to 3,500 feet (1,066.8 meters). The “king’s highway,” an ancient trade route from Damascus through the Transjordan to the Gulf of Aqaba, passed through its territory and major cities, Bozrah and Leman. While Edom was not fertile, it did have cultivable areas (20:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>During Israel’s march to the Transjordan region, Edom refused to let Israel journey directly east from Kadesh through its territory but forced Israel to move southeast into and up the Arabah (21:4, 11). In spite of this hostility to God’s people, Israel was forbidden to attack (Dt 2:2-8) or to hate the Edomites (23:7), and so Edom was spared from destruction during the conquest of the land. The area was later conquered by David (2 Sm 8:13-14) according to Balaam’s prophecy (Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<h6>Arad (21:1-3)<\/h6>\n<p>Arad was a south Canaanite settlement in the Negev. Its king, after fighting against Israel and taking some captives, was later defeated at Hormah.<\/p>\n<h6>Moabites (21:11-15; 22:1–24:25)<\/h6>\n<p>Moab, occupied by the descendants of Lot (Gn 19:37), is the territory east of the Dead Sea lying primarily between the Wadi Arnon (Nm 21:13) and the Wadi Zered with a land area of approximately 1,400 square miles (3,626 square kilometers).<\/p>\n<p>In the late middle Bronze Age, the Moabites had overflowed their main plateau and had extended well to the north of the Arnon all the way to the northern end of the Dead Sea (21:20). At the time of the events recorded in Numbers, however, the Amorites occupied the area from Arnon all the way north to the Wadi Jabbok (vv 13, 21-24), having earlier taken this land from Moab (vv 26-30). The Moabite kingdom was highly organized, with agriculture and livestock, splendid buildings, distinctive pottery, and strong fortifications around her borders. Its god was Chemosh (v 29).<\/p>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab during the period of the conquest, in league with Midian, hired Balaam to curse Israel (chs 22–24). When this failed, the two heathen powers sought to neutralize Israel by luring the people of God into the worship of Chemosh and into idolatry (25:1-2). In the war that ensued, Israel defeated Midian (31:1-18), but by God’s express command (Dt 2:9-13) spared Moab. But as Balaam had prophesied earlier (Nm 24:17), David in the 11th century warred against and defeated Moab (2 Sm 8:2, 13-14).<\/p>\n<h6>Amorites (21:21-35)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amorites, the people who had occupied northern Moabite territory (Nm 21:25-30), were descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:16) who had scattered throughout the hill country on both sides of the Jordan River. Heshbon was their capital city. Both Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan were Amorite kings (Dt 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As for Bashan (Nm 21:33-35; cf. Dt 1:4; 3:1-12), it is the fertile grazing region (Nm 32:1-5) east of the Sea of Kinnereth (Galilee), whose northern border extended to Mt Hermon and whose southern border, while normally the river Yarmuk, in the Mosaic age was the Wadi Jabbok (Jos 12:4-5). Its land area covered approximately 5,000 square miles (12,950 square kilometers). Its major cities were Ashtaroth, Edrei, and Golan. After the conquest of the land, this territory fell to the half-tribe of Manasseh, with Gad occupying southern Gilead, and Reuben the region south to the Wadi Arnon.<\/p>\n<h6>Midianites (25:16-18; 31:1-54)<\/h6>\n<p>The Midianites, descendants of Abraham through the concubine Keturah (Gn 25:2), were desert dwellers in Transjordan from Moab to the region south of Edom. The elders of Moab and Midian cooperated in hiring Balaam to curse Israel (Nm 22:4-7). Later, when that effort proved fruitless, the Midianites, again with Moab, led Israel into idolatry and immorality (25:1-6, 14-15). Cozbi, the Midianite woman who was executed for her wickedness (25:8), was the daughter of Zur, one of the five Midianite kings confederate with the Amorite king Sihon (Jos 13:21) who were later killed in Israel’s holy war against Midian (Nm 31:8). This war with Midian apparently broke the back of any remaining Amorite resistance, for Joshua 13:15-23 clearly intimates that as a result the tribe of Reuben occupied this territory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Numbers serves a twofold purpose. First, as a historical book, it contains the account of Israel’s fortunes from Mt Sinai to the plains of Moab on the eve of the conquest of Canaan—that almost-40-year period spent in the wilderness of Sinai and in Transjordan (1447–1407 <span>BC<\/span>). While recounting Israel’s many failures and God’s many faithful acts, it depicts Moses, Israel’s leader, in all of his greatness and in all of his weakness. The two army rolls (chs 2 and 26) introduce the “acts” of the main drama of its history: the first in preparation for entering the land, which failed due to Israel’s unbelief; the second, after the death of the entire generation that left Egypt, in preparation for the successful invasion of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Second, in line with Paul’s general belief that “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope” (Rom 15:4, <span>rsv<\/span>), and in keeping with his specific teaching that “these things [that befell Israel in the wilderness] happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11, <span>rsv<\/span>), Numbers serves a doctrinal, typical, and hortatory purpose (cf. v 12). Historical events are divinely invested with spiritual truths, thereby becoming object lessons for the Christian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to register (Nm 1:18) the men able to go to war (vv 2-3). The total number of soldiers in Israel was 603,550 (v 46). The Levites were not numbered in this roll (vv 47-54), since they were to be set apart for special service pertaining to the tabernacle.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 2<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses concerning the arrangement of the tribes while encamped and on the march. With the tabernacle in the center of the camp, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, totaling 186,400 (v 9), were to camp on the east; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, totaling 151,450 (v 16), were to camp on the south; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, totaling 108,100 (v 24), were to camp on the west; and Dan, Asher, and Naphtali, totaling 157,600 (v 31), were to camp on the north.<\/p>\n<p>On the march, Judah’s east group (v 9) was to set out first, followed by Reuben’s south group (v 16). The Levites with the tabernacle were to follow (v 17). Then Ephraim’s west group (v 24) was to follow the Levites, with Dan’s north group (v 31) bringing up the rear. This means that the Levites were flanked by two groups, before and behind.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 3<\/h5>\n<p>Aaron, the great-grandson of Levi through Kohath (Ex 6:16-20), and his descendants were designated to serve as priests at the tabernacle (Nm 3:2-3). The remaining descendants of Levi, from the families of Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, were to serve the Aaronic line at the tabernacle (vv 5-10). The Gershonites were responsible for the tabernacle coverings, hangings, and screens (vv 25-26); the Kohathites were responsible for the “furniture” in the tabernacle (v 31); and the Merarites were responsible for the frames, bars, and foundations for the tabernacle (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed Moses to number the three Levitical families. Gershon’s descendants, totaling 7,500 (v 22), were to camp on the west, between the western group of tribes and the tabernacle. Kohath’s descendants, totaling 8,600 (v 28), were to camp on the south, between the southern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Merari’s descendants, totaling 6,200 (v 34), were to camp on the north, between the northern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Moses and the Aaronic family were to camp on the east, between the eastern group of tribes and the tabernacle (v 38). Both in camp and on the march, then, the tabernacle was in the midst of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The census of Israel’s firstborn males disclosed 273 more male babies than Levites (vv 40-46), and since the Levites were a ransom for Israelite males on a one-to-one basis, the 273 additional male children had to be ransomed by atonement money (vv 46-51).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 4<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Moses that only Levites between the ages of 30 and 50 were to serve at the tabernacle. A census disclosed that there were 2,750 Kohathites (v 36), 2,630 Gershonites (v 40), and 3,200 Merarites (v 44), making a total of 8,580 (v 48) who were eligible to serve the Aaronic priests.<\/p>\n<p>God further ordered the Aaronic priests, when the tabernacle was being dismantled for the march, to cover all the tabernacle “furniture” before the Kohathites even looked at them (v 20) lest the Kohathites, either looking at or touching them (v 15), should die (vv 15, 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 5<\/h5>\n<p>For ceremonial purposes, God demanded that lepers, those with a bodily discharge, and those who had touched the dead, must be put outside the camp until they were purified (vv 1-4). Furthermore, God instructed those making restitution for a wrongdoing, if the wronged person was no longer alive, to give the restitution price to a priest (vv 5-10).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, if a woman was suspected by her husband of infidelity but there was no evidence of such, the woman was to undergo a trial by water ordeal to relieve the man of his suspicions. The priest was to give her holy water with dust from the floor of the tabernacle in it to drink. If she was guilty, the water by divine direction would cause her pain, make her abdomen swell, and her thigh waste away (vv 11-31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 6<\/h5>\n<p>Laws pertaining to the Nazirite were given next. A Nazirite was a person who determined to take a vow to separate himself wholly to the Lord. To dramatize this separation, the Nazirite was to drink no intoxicating beverage, let the hair grow long, and touch no dead body (vv 3-6). Should he defile himself, he was to follow prescribed rules for ceremonial cleansing (vv 9-12). When his vow had run its course, he was to follow prescribed rules for terminating his vow (vv 13-21). Finally, God instructed the Aaronic priesthood concerning the blessing they were to pronounce upon the Israelite worshiper (vv 22-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 7<\/h5>\n<p>The leaders in Israel brought six wagons and twelve oxen for use in the transfer of the tabernacle (7:3). Moses gave two wagons and four oxen to the Gershonites (v 7), and four wagons and eight oxen to the Merarites (v 8). (The Kohathites were to carry the “furniture” of the tabernacle on their shoulders, v 9.) For twelve consecutive days, to consecrate the altar after it was anointed (vv 10, 88), the tribal leaders, in the order of march (cf. ch 2), brought similar offerings. God demonstrated his pleasure with this gesture by speaking to Moses from the mercy seat (v 89).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 8<\/h5>\n<p>God granted the prerogative to light the seven-branched lampstand to the Aaronic priests (vv 1-4). Following divine instructions, Moses and Aaron consecrated the Levites to the service of the tabernacle by means of a purification ceremony (vv 5-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 9:1–10:10<\/h5>\n<p>For the benefit of the worshiper who was ceremonially unclean or away on a journey at the time of the Passover, God granted permission to observe the Passover a month later (vv 6-12; see also ch 27).<\/p>\n<p>God gave final instructions to the people before their departure from Sinai. They were to prepare for marching when they saw the cloud ascending from the tabernacle, and they were to stop at the place where the cloud settled down (9:15-23). The people were to assemble at the tabernacle if two silver trumpets were blown; only the leaders were to come if one was blown; and at the blast of a military alarm, the several groups of tribes were to prepare for an immediate march (10:1-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 10:11–14:45<\/h5>\n<p>The next section recounts the march from Sinai to Kadesh-barnea, a period of time approximately one and a half to two months in length (cf. 10:11; 13:20). Almost immediately the people began to complain as they passed through the terrible wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19), angering the Lord at Taberah (Nm 11:1-3) and at Kibroth-hattaavah (Nm 11:4-35; Pss 78:26-31; 106:13-15). Miriam and Aaron challenged Moses’ sole right to speak for God to the people, which resulted in temporary leprosy as punishment for Miriam (doubtless the leader in the provocation). Through Moses’ intercession, the two were forgiven (Nm 12). Out of this event, however, came the remarkable description of Moses’ relationship to God as a unique means of revelation (vv 6-8).<\/p>\n<p>From Paran (Kadesh-barnea) Moses dispatched the spies to survey the land (ch 13). Deuteronomy 1:22 suggests that the plan to spy out the land originated with the people, with Moses (at God’s behest) acquiescing. At the end of 40 days, they returned. Only Caleb and Joshua urged the people to advance to the conquest; the other 10 spies spoke of foes too formidable for them to defeat. The people, greatly discouraged, attempted to stone Caleb and Joshua (Nm 14:10), and were prevented from doing so only by the sudden appearance of the glory cloud at the tabernacle. God swore in his wrath (Nm 14:21; cf. Heb 3:7–4:10) that, with the exception of Caleb and Joshua, none of that generation would enter the land of promise (Nm 14:21-35). He then struck down the 10 unbelieving spies (v 37). Presumptuously, and in spite of God’s express command to the contrary (Dt 1:42), Israel attempted to advance on the land, leaving Moses and the ark of the covenant in the camp. They were challenged by the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Israel remained in this general area with tribal families fanning out over the wilderness and settling around springs and oases (Dt 1:46). Numbers 15:1–21:20 relates the account of the 38 years of wilderness wandering. Much of this time was probably spent around Kadesh-barnea (Dt 1:46).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 15<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given (Nm 15:1-21). Also, the procedure to be followed when an Israelite committed a sin deliberately and defiantly was spelled out in terms of excommunication: there was no atonement for such an attitude (vv 22-31). A Sabbath violator was executed (vv 32-36), perhaps as an illustration of the foregoing legislation. Finally, to assist them in obeying God’s laws, the Israelites were instructed to tie blue tassels to their outer garments as reminders (vv 37-41).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 16<\/h5>\n<p>Korah challenged Aaron’s high priesthood, and Dathan, Abiram, and On challenged Moses’ leadership (vv 1-14). God, at Moses’ word, opened up the earth and swallowed the offenders (Nm 16:32; cf. Dt 9:6; Ps 106:16-18). Korah is regarded in the NT (Jude 1:11) as a classic example of a rebellious malcontent.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 26:11 states that Korah’s young children did not perish with him. Perhaps they became the ancestors of the “sons of Korah,” the sacred musicians of the temple who composed 12 Korahite psalms (Pss 42–49, 84–85, 87–88).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 17<\/h5>\n<p>God then instructed the leaders of each tribe to bring rods, 12 in all, to write the names of the tribes upon them (with Aaron’s name on Levi’s rod), and to deposit them in the tabernacle. The following day, Aaron’s rod had sprouted with blossoms and ripe almonds, thus vindicating Aaron’s special high-priestly status.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 18–19<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given. In 18:1-7, the full responsibility for the priestly service was given to the Aaronic priests—a very natural consequence of the preceding chapter. The Levites were to assist the Aaronic order (v 6). Since the tribe of Levi received no land inheritance, they were to be supported from the offerings of the people (vv 8-20).<\/p>\n<p>In 19:1-22 instructions concerning ceremonial impurity were given. When an Israelite became ceremonially unclean through contact with death (vv 11-16), God required that he be purified from his sin (vv 9, 17) by the sprinkling of specially prepared water upon him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 20<\/h5>\n<p>With Israel once again at Kadesh on the southern border of the wilderness of Zin in the first month of the 40th year of wandering, Miriam died and was buried (v 1). According to the encampment list in chapter 33, 18 encampments may have occurred for Israel since the nation had last been at this site (cf. 33:18-36).<\/p>\n<p>At this time the nation complained once again because there was little water (20:2). Moses, at God’s instruction, brought forth water from a rock (vv 8-11), but because of a gross infraction by Moses and Aaron on this occasion, God announced that they would not be permitted to lead Israel in the conquest of the land (vv 12, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The chapter closes with Edom refusing Israel passage across its territory (vv 14-21) and Aaron dying on Mt Hor on the border of Edom (vv 22-29) in the fifth month of the 40th year (33:38). Eleazar, Aaron’s son, assumed the office of high priest.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 21<\/h5>\n<p>After a quick victory over Arad (vv 1-3), Israel started south to encircle Edom. Becoming impatient with God and with Moses, the people expressed their disgust with God’s provision of manna. The Lord sent poisonous snakes to the camp, causing many to die. But at God’s command Moses fashioned a snake out of bronze and placed it atop a standard. All who looked to the bronze snake survived (vv 4-10). The bronze snake was preserved and later was destroyed by Hezekiah, the symbol having become by his time an idol (2 Kgs 18:4). Later still, Jesus drew an analogy between these wicked sinners looking to the bronze snake and being delivered and men looking to him by faith and being saved (Jn 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Leaving that fateful place, Israel journeyed into and up the Arabah, crossed the Wadi Zered in an eastern swing around Moab, finally crossing the Arnon into Amorite territory. Journeying north, they camped at Pisgah (Nm 21:10-20).<\/p>\n<p>At this point the conquest of the Transjordan begins. In quick succession Israel defeated Sihon of Heshbon (vv 21-31) and Og of Bashan (vv 33-35) and settled in the plains of Moab (22:1). This encampment was the scene for the remainder of the activities of Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua 1–3. In a real sense, one can say the wilderness wanderings were now over.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the place, then, to summarize the spiritual condition of Israel on the eve of the conquest of Canaan. Numbers makes it quite evident that the entire generation that left Egypt, with the exception of Joshua and Caleb, was to die in the wilderness because of its apostasy (cf. Am 5:25), unbelief, and general failure to keep covenant with God. None of the generation of male children born in the wilderness had been circumcised (Jos 5:2-9). Psalm 90 underscores Israel as the recipient of God’s wrath in the wilderness. It is in this pitiable spiritual condition that Israel arrived on the plains of Moab.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 22–24<\/h5>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab, frightened by Israel’s presence, joined with Midian to hire Balaam, the false prophet, to curse Israel. For gain, Balaam agreed (2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11), but God prevented him, causing him rather to bless Israel in his four oracular utterances (Nm 23:7-10, 18-24; 24:3-9, 15-19) and to predict the destruction of Moab, Edom, Amalek (24:20), the Kenites (24:21), and Asshur (24:24). With that, Balak and Balaam separated. Balaam, in collusion with Midian, agreed to counsel Israel to commit idolatry and immorality (31:16). And so, where Balak failed to turn the Lord against Israel, Balaam succeeded (ch 25).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 25<\/h5>\n<p>Israel sinned against God by idolatrous and immoral acts with the people of Moab (vv 1-3). In carrying out the command of God to destroy the reprobate Israelites, Phinehas killed Zimri and Cozbi, the latter being a daughter of one of the five kings of Midian (vv 4-14). This event provided the occasion for God to declare a holy war against Midian (vv 16-18; cf. ch 31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 26<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to take a roll of the men of the second generation who were capable of warring against Israel’s enemies. The total number came to 601,730 (v 51), a reduction of 1,820 men from the first count. With a smaller force than the first generation, Israel conquered Canaan, clearly indicating that Israel could have spared itself the years of wandering if only the nation had obeyed God 38 years before Kadesh. The Levites totaled 23,000 males a month old and upward (vv 57-62).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 27<\/h5>\n<p>At the request of the daughters of Zelophehad (cf. 26:33) that they be granted the right to inherit their father’s possessions since he had no sons, the Lord agreed that they could, using the occasion to give further laws of inheritance (vv 1-11).<\/p>\n<p>Reminded that he would soon die in Abarim, Moses requested that God appoint his successor. God selected Joshua, and Moses commissioned him (vv 12-23).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 28–30<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation regarding offerings for various occasions was given. God also instructed Moses to inform the people concerning vows. When a man made a vow, it was inviolable (30:2), but if a woman made a vow, the man (father, husband) responsible for her could nullify it if he felt that it was rash (vv 1-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 31<\/h5>\n<p>The account of the holy war declared against Midian in 25:16-18 is given. With Phinehas accompanying 12,000 warriors, Israel defeated Midian, killing Balaam along with the five kings and many male adults of Midian (31:1-8). The Midianite women and children were taken captive, but Moses commanded that all the male children and the nonvirgin women be killed (vv 9-18). One must not conclude that this war meant the end of Midian as such, for Midian later proved a formidable foe of Israel in the time of the judges (Jgs 6).<\/p>\n<p>After the battle, the warriors were instructed to purify themselves, their clothing, and the booty from the war before coming into the camp (Nm 31:19-24). Furthermore, they were instructed to divide the booty in half and to contribute one-fifth of one percent of their half to the high priest (“the Lord’s tribute”). The other half was divided among the people who had remained in camp, after the Levites received a two percent contribution (vv 25-31).<\/p>\n<p>Verses 32-47 give the tally of the booty after its division into two parts and the amount that was given from each part to Eleazar and the Levites. The tally is said by some to be too high to be authentic, but there is no evidence that disputes the recorded figures.<\/p>\n<p>In thanksgiving to God because no Israelite had been killed in the war (v 49) and to make atonement for themselves (v 50), the army officers brought a special offering of gold trinkets to Moses and Eleazar, which was placed in the tabernacle as a memorial (vv 48-54).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 32<\/h5>\n<p>At their request and on the condition that they aid the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh were allotted the Transjordan region. Moses earnestly besought the Lord to change his mind about not permitting him to enter the land of promise (Dt 3:23-27). But God would not let him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 33–34<\/h5>\n<p>At God’s command, Moses kept a written record of Israel’s itinerary from Egypt to the plains of Moab. Here is biblical evidence of the Mosaic authorship of Numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The boundaries of the Promised Land were now given. The southern boundary would run from the southern tip of the Dead Sea, south of Kadesh-barnea up to the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish), and on to the Mediterranean Sea (34:3-5). The western boundary would be the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea itself (v 6). The northern boundary, not realized until the times of David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3-12; 1 Kgs 8:65), was to extend from the Mediterranean Sea east to Hamath, at the head of the Orontes River (Nm 34:7-9). The eastern boundary was to be practically on a vertical line, with the Jordan Valley running north to the northern boundary (vv 10-12). The nine and a half tribes were to divide this area among themselves (vv 13-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then selected the men who were to bear the responsibility of dividing the land of Canaan among the western tribes after the conquest (vv 16-29).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 35<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Israel to give 48 cities throughout the land on both sides of the Jordan to the Levites for a permanent possession (vv 1-8), since that tribe was not included in the land allotments to the other tribes. The number of cities each tribe was to give was to be determined by its size (v 8). Six of the Levitical cities, three on each side of the Jordan, were to be designated “cities of refuge” for the manslayer (v 6; cf. Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>Legislation concerning the manslayer follows (vv 9-34). If the slayer committed murder, the kinsman avenger had the right to fulfill his role as executioner (vv 16-21). If, however, the killing was unintentional, the manslayer was to flee to the nearest city of refuge for a trial. If found innocent of murder, he was assigned to remain within the city of refuge until the death of the high priest. If he left the city before then, the kinsman avenger was permitted to execute him (vv 22-34).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 36<\/h5>\n<p>Basing their question on the earlier law established in chapter 27, the leaders from Manasseh asked whether an heiress should be allowed to marry outside her tribe, with the accompanying transfer of property from one tribe to another that would ensue. God directed that an heiress would have to marry within her tribe (vv 1-12).<\/p>\n<p>The last verse of the book refers to all the laws given in the plains of Moab (26:1–36:12; cf. Lv 27:34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalTeaching\">Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Numbers God is revealed as the unchangingly faithful God of the covenant (Nm 23:19). This faithfulness to his covenant required that he both guide and care for his people and punish their sins against him. But no impediment was so great that God’s design to bring his people to the land of promise was thwarted (11:23).<\/p>\n<p>Both by his wrathful reaction to Israel’s sin and by the numerous priestly laws, God highlights his awesome holiness. The legislation expressly teaches that the person who approaches God must be clean. Even to look with unholy eyes upon the holiness of God meant death (4:20).<\/p>\n<p>His sovereignty over all of life is evident from the attention he displays over even the minutest aspects of life. The phrase “And the Lord said unto Moses” occurs over 50 times, and the words that follow in each case deal with all kinds of matters.<\/p>\n<p>As the God of the covenant, God’s “christological” character is also apparent. God’s blessing and faithfulness reflect the christological motif. Finally, Moses’ prophetic leadership (Acts 7:37-38) and intercessory ministry (e.g., Nm 11:2; 12:13; 14:19), in the Aaronic priesthood (e.g., ch 16), in the animal sacrifices (cf. 19:9; Heb 9:13), and in the symbols (the manna, the water, the bronze snake) foreshadow the future Christ.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s responses to God, the people depict all of human sinfulness and faithlessness. Israel’s wanderings illustrate the results of unbelief. The punishments of Israel prove the maxim of Numbers 32:23: “But if you fail to keep your word, then you will have sinned against the <span>Lord<\/span>, and you may be sure that your sin will find you out” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Numbers forcefully teaches that safety and blessing are to be found only in trust in the Lord. Only he is capable of bringing men and women to the place of rest (Heb 4:9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Deuteronomy, Book of; Exodus, Book of; Genesis, Book of; Leviticus, Book of; Moses; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NUMBERS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, <em>Numeri.<\/em> The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The question of the authorship of Numbers is part of the larger question of the authorship of the Pentateuch. Until the appearance of the higher-critical documentary theories of the 19th century, the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was almost universally held by both Jews and Christians alike. This time-honored tradition is supported by the Pentateuch itself (e.g., Ex 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Nm 33:2; Dt 31:9, 24), the rest of the OT (e.g., Jos 23:6; Jgs 3:4; Mal 4:4), as well as Jesus’ teaching (e.g., Jn 5:46-47), and the rest of the NT (e.g., Acts 28:23; Rom 10:19; 1 Cor 9:9). Although discrepancies in the Pentateuch were widely and openly acknowledged, nevertheless Moses, the 15th-century <span>BC<\/span> lawgiver, was affirmed as the primary author of the Pentateuchal literature.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<h5>Sinai Peninsula<\/h5>\n<p>The historical background of Numbers begins primarily in the geographical region of the Sinai Peninsula of the mid-second millennium <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai Peninsula is in the shape of an inverted triangle with the base on the north. It is approximately 240 miles (386.2 kilometers) long from north to south and 175 miles (281.6 kilometers) wide at the northern base, with an area of approximately 22,000 square miles (56,980 square kilometers). It is bounded on the north by the Mediterranean Sea and the southern border of Canaan, on the west by the Bitter Lakes and the Gulf of Suez, and on the east by the Arabah and the Gulf of Aqaba. Beginning in the north at the Mediterranean coast and moving south, for about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the soil is sandy. South of this coastal plain is a high plateau (Et-Tih) of gravel and limestone (about 2,500 feet, or 762 meters, above sea level), stretching south into the peninsula for approximately 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). Rising above the plateau at this point is a granite mountain formation with peaks up to 8,000 feet (2,438.4 meters) above sea level. In this mountainous region at the apex of the peninsular triangle, Jebel Musa (7,363 feet, or 2,244.2 meters, high), the traditional site where Israel camped before Mt Sinai and Moses received the law, rises above the plain.<\/p>\n<p>The peninsula itself is comprised of five wilderness areas. In the north and immediately east of the land of Goshen is the approximately 40-mile- or 64.4-kilometer-wide wilderness of Shur, which runs past the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) to the region of Kadesh-barnea and northeast to Beersheba. East of this region is the wilderness of Zin, extending east from the wilderness of Shur to the southern tip of the Dead Sea. Kadesh-barnea is located on its southern border (Nm 20:1; 33:36). South of the wilderness of Shur is the wilderness of Etham, and east of this wilderness in the east-central region of Sinai is the great wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19). Kadesh-barnea is on the northern border of this territory (Nm 13:26). In this area the Israelites spent 38 of their 40 years of wandering. Southwest of the wilderness of Paran, on the western slopes of the peninsula, not far from the granite mountains standing in the southern apex of the triangle, is the wilderness of Sin.<\/p>\n<p>While the region is generally desolate and barren, it is not impassable or incapable of sustaining travelers. Wells and springs dot both the western and eastern borders at reasonable distances from each other. The water table is fairly close to ground level, making the digging of wells possible (Nm 20:17; 21:16-18). The limestone rocks are also capable of holding great amounts of water (20:11). Vegetation is sparse except around the more permanent streams where vegetation and date palms flourish. The rainy season in winter is approximately 20 days. Quail (11:31-32) are known to migrate across the peninsula to Europe in the spring.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Peoples Israel Confronted<\/h5>\n<h6>Amalekites and Canaanites (14:25, 43-45; 24:20)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amalekites were descendants of Amalek, son of Eliphaz and grandson of Esau (Gn 36:12, 16). They were generally a nomadic people. In the Sinai Peninsula they were the first to war against Israel at Rephidim (cf. Nm 24:20), perhaps the Wadi Refayid in southwest Sinai (Ex 17:8-16), before Israel reached Horeb. A year later, the Amalekites settled in the hills and valleys north of Kadesh-barnea. In league with the Canaanites, the inhabitants of Palestine, they blocked the effort of Israel to invade the land of promise from the south (Nm 14:45). Israel’s will to wage war appears to have been completely broken for years to come.<\/p>\n<h6>Edomites (20:14-21; 21:4, 10-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Edom, or Seir (24:18), is the territory south of the Dead Sea occupied by Esau’s descendants. Stretching from its northern border at the Wadi Zered (21:12), which flowed into the Dead Sea at its southern tip, 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) south to the Gulf of Aqaba, it occupied both sides of the Arabah, with Kadesh-barnea again standing on the edge of its western border (20:16), giving it a land area of approximately 4,000 square miles (10,360 square kilometers). It is a rugged mountain region with peaks rising to 3,500 feet (1,066.8 meters). The “king’s highway,” an ancient trade route from Damascus through the Transjordan to the Gulf of Aqaba, passed through its territory and major cities, Bozrah and Leman. While Edom was not fertile, it did have cultivable areas (20:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>During Israel’s march to the Transjordan region, Edom refused to let Israel journey directly east from Kadesh through its territory but forced Israel to move southeast into and up the Arabah (21:4, 11). In spite of this hostility to God’s people, Israel was forbidden to attack (Dt 2:2-8) or to hate the Edomites (23:7), and so Edom was spared from destruction during the conquest of the land. The area was later conquered by David (2 Sm 8:13-14) according to Balaam’s prophecy (Nm 24:18).<\/p>\n<h6>Arad (21:1-3)<\/h6>\n<p>Arad was a south Canaanite settlement in the Negev. Its king, after fighting against Israel and taking some captives, was later defeated at Hormah.<\/p>\n<h6>Moabites (21:11-15; 22:1–24:25)<\/h6>\n<p>Moab, occupied by the descendants of Lot (Gn 19:37), is the territory east of the Dead Sea lying primarily between the Wadi Arnon (Nm 21:13) and the Wadi Zered with a land area of approximately 1,400 square miles (3,626 square kilometers).<\/p>\n<p>In the late middle Bronze Age, the Moabites had overflowed their main plateau and had extended well to the north of the Arnon all the way to the northern end of the Dead Sea (21:20). At the time of the events recorded in Numbers, however, the Amorites occupied the area from Arnon all the way north to the Wadi Jabbok (vv 13, 21-24), having earlier taken this land from Moab (vv 26-30). The Moabite kingdom was highly organized, with agriculture and livestock, splendid buildings, distinctive pottery, and strong fortifications around her borders. Its god was Chemosh (v 29).<\/p>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab during the period of the conquest, in league with Midian, hired Balaam to curse Israel (chs 22–24). When this failed, the two heathen powers sought to neutralize Israel by luring the people of God into the worship of Chemosh and into idolatry (25:1-2). In the war that ensued, Israel defeated Midian (31:1-18), but by God’s express command (Dt 2:9-13) spared Moab. But as Balaam had prophesied earlier (Nm 24:17), David in the 11th century warred against and defeated Moab (2 Sm 8:2, 13-14).<\/p>\n<h6>Amorites (21:21-35)<\/h6>\n<p>The Amorites, the people who had occupied northern Moabite territory (Nm 21:25-30), were descendants of Canaan (Gn 10:16) who had scattered throughout the hill country on both sides of the Jordan River. Heshbon was their capital city. Both Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan were Amorite kings (Dt 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As for Bashan (Nm 21:33-35; cf. Dt 1:4; 3:1-12), it is the fertile grazing region (Nm 32:1-5) east of the Sea of Kinnereth (Galilee), whose northern border extended to Mt Hermon and whose southern border, while normally the river Yarmuk, in the Mosaic age was the Wadi Jabbok (Jos 12:4-5). Its land area covered approximately 5,000 square miles (12,950 square kilometers). Its major cities were Ashtaroth, Edrei, and Golan. After the conquest of the land, this territory fell to the half-tribe of Manasseh, with Gad occupying southern Gilead, and Reuben the region south to the Wadi Arnon.<\/p>\n<h6>Midianites (25:16-18; 31:1-54)<\/h6>\n<p>The Midianites, descendants of Abraham through the concubine Keturah (Gn 25:2), were desert dwellers in Transjordan from Moab to the region south of Edom. The elders of Moab and Midian cooperated in hiring Balaam to curse Israel (Nm 22:4-7). Later, when that effort proved fruitless, the Midianites, again with Moab, led Israel into idolatry and immorality (25:1-6, 14-15). Cozbi, the Midianite woman who was executed for her wickedness (25:8), was the daughter of Zur, one of the five Midianite kings confederate with the Amorite king Sihon (Jos 13:21) who were later killed in Israel’s holy war against Midian (Nm 31:8). This war with Midian apparently broke the back of any remaining Amorite resistance, for Joshua 13:15-23 clearly intimates that as a result the tribe of Reuben occupied this territory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Numbers serves a twofold purpose. First, as a historical book, it contains the account of Israel’s fortunes from Mt Sinai to the plains of Moab on the eve of the conquest of Canaan—that almost-40-year period spent in the wilderness of Sinai and in Transjordan (1447–1407 <span>BC<\/span>). While recounting Israel’s many failures and God’s many faithful acts, it depicts Moses, Israel’s leader, in all of his greatness and in all of his weakness. The two army rolls (chs 2 and 26) introduce the “acts” of the main drama of its history: the first in preparation for entering the land, which failed due to Israel’s unbelief; the second, after the death of the entire generation that left Egypt, in preparation for the successful invasion of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Second, in line with Paul’s general belief that “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope” (Rom 15:4, <span>rsv<\/span>), and in keeping with his specific teaching that “these things [that befell Israel in the wilderness] happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11, <span>rsv<\/span>), Numbers serves a doctrinal, typical, and hortatory purpose (cf. v 12). Historical events are divinely invested with spiritual truths, thereby becoming object lessons for the Christian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to register (Nm 1:18) the men able to go to war (vv 2-3). The total number of soldiers in Israel was 603,550 (v 46). The Levites were not numbered in this roll (vv 47-54), since they were to be set apart for special service pertaining to the tabernacle.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 2<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses concerning the arrangement of the tribes while encamped and on the march. With the tabernacle in the center of the camp, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, totaling 186,400 (v 9), were to camp on the east; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, totaling 151,450 (v 16), were to camp on the south; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, totaling 108,100 (v 24), were to camp on the west; and Dan, Asher, and Naphtali, totaling 157,600 (v 31), were to camp on the north.<\/p>\n<p>On the march, Judah’s east group (v 9) was to set out first, followed by Reuben’s south group (v 16). The Levites with the tabernacle were to follow (v 17). Then Ephraim’s west group (v 24) was to follow the Levites, with Dan’s north group (v 31) bringing up the rear. This means that the Levites were flanked by two groups, before and behind.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 3<\/h5>\n<p>Aaron, the great-grandson of Levi through Kohath (Ex 6:16-20), and his descendants were designated to serve as priests at the tabernacle (Nm 3:2-3). The remaining descendants of Levi, from the families of Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, were to serve the Aaronic line at the tabernacle (vv 5-10). The Gershonites were responsible for the tabernacle coverings, hangings, and screens (vv 25-26); the Kohathites were responsible for the “furniture” in the tabernacle (v 31); and the Merarites were responsible for the frames, bars, and foundations for the tabernacle (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed Moses to number the three Levitical families. Gershon’s descendants, totaling 7,500 (v 22), were to camp on the west, between the western group of tribes and the tabernacle. Kohath’s descendants, totaling 8,600 (v 28), were to camp on the south, between the southern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Merari’s descendants, totaling 6,200 (v 34), were to camp on the north, between the northern group of tribes and the tabernacle. Moses and the Aaronic family were to camp on the east, between the eastern group of tribes and the tabernacle (v 38). Both in camp and on the march, then, the tabernacle was in the midst of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The census of Israel’s firstborn males disclosed 273 more male babies than Levites (vv 40-46), and since the Levites were a ransom for Israelite males on a one-to-one basis, the 273 additional male children had to be ransomed by atonement money (vv 46-51).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 4<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Moses that only Levites between the ages of 30 and 50 were to serve at the tabernacle. A census disclosed that there were 2,750 Kohathites (v 36), 2,630 Gershonites (v 40), and 3,200 Merarites (v 44), making a total of 8,580 (v 48) who were eligible to serve the Aaronic priests.<\/p>\n<p>God further ordered the Aaronic priests, when the tabernacle was being dismantled for the march, to cover all the tabernacle “furniture” before the Kohathites even looked at them (v 20) lest the Kohathites, either looking at or touching them (v 15), should die (vv 15, 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 5<\/h5>\n<p>For ceremonial purposes, God demanded that lepers, those with a bodily discharge, and those who had touched the dead, must be put outside the camp until they were purified (vv 1-4). Furthermore, God instructed those making restitution for a wrongdoing, if the wronged person was no longer alive, to give the restitution price to a priest (vv 5-10).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, if a woman was suspected by her husband of infidelity but there was no evidence of such, the woman was to undergo a trial by water ordeal to relieve the man of his suspicions. The priest was to give her holy water with dust from the floor of the tabernacle in it to drink. If she was guilty, the water by divine direction would cause her pain, make her abdomen swell, and her thigh waste away (vv 11-31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 6<\/h5>\n<p>Laws pertaining to the Nazirite were given next. A Nazirite was a person who determined to take a vow to separate himself wholly to the Lord. To dramatize this separation, the Nazirite was to drink no intoxicating beverage, let the hair grow long, and touch no dead body (vv 3-6). Should he defile himself, he was to follow prescribed rules for ceremonial cleansing (vv 9-12). When his vow had run its course, he was to follow prescribed rules for terminating his vow (vv 13-21). Finally, God instructed the Aaronic priesthood concerning the blessing they were to pronounce upon the Israelite worshiper (vv 22-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 7<\/h5>\n<p>The leaders in Israel brought six wagons and twelve oxen for use in the transfer of the tabernacle (7:3). Moses gave two wagons and four oxen to the Gershonites (v 7), and four wagons and eight oxen to the Merarites (v 8). (The Kohathites were to carry the “furniture” of the tabernacle on their shoulders, v 9.) For twelve consecutive days, to consecrate the altar after it was anointed (vv 10, 88), the tribal leaders, in the order of march (cf. ch 2), brought similar offerings. God demonstrated his pleasure with this gesture by speaking to Moses from the mercy seat (v 89).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 8<\/h5>\n<p>God granted the prerogative to light the seven-branched lampstand to the Aaronic priests (vv 1-4). Following divine instructions, Moses and Aaron consecrated the Levites to the service of the tabernacle by means of a purification ceremony (vv 5-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 9:1–10:10<\/h5>\n<p>For the benefit of the worshiper who was ceremonially unclean or away on a journey at the time of the Passover, God granted permission to observe the Passover a month later (vv 6-12; see also ch 27).<\/p>\n<p>God gave final instructions to the people before their departure from Sinai. They were to prepare for marching when they saw the cloud ascending from the tabernacle, and they were to stop at the place where the cloud settled down (9:15-23). The people were to assemble at the tabernacle if two silver trumpets were blown; only the leaders were to come if one was blown; and at the blast of a military alarm, the several groups of tribes were to prepare for an immediate march (10:1-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 10:11–14:45<\/h5>\n<p>The next section recounts the march from Sinai to Kadesh-barnea, a period of time approximately one and a half to two months in length (cf. 10:11; 13:20). Almost immediately the people began to complain as they passed through the terrible wilderness of Paran (Dt 1:19), angering the Lord at Taberah (Nm 11:1-3) and at Kibroth-hattaavah (Nm 11:4-35; Pss 78:26-31; 106:13-15). Miriam and Aaron challenged Moses’ sole right to speak for God to the people, which resulted in temporary leprosy as punishment for Miriam (doubtless the leader in the provocation). Through Moses’ intercession, the two were forgiven (Nm 12). Out of this event, however, came the remarkable description of Moses’ relationship to God as a unique means of revelation (vv 6-8).<\/p>\n<p>From Paran (Kadesh-barnea) Moses dispatched the spies to survey the land (ch 13). Deuteronomy 1:22 suggests that the plan to spy out the land originated with the people, with Moses (at God’s behest) acquiescing. At the end of 40 days, they returned. Only Caleb and Joshua urged the people to advance to the conquest; the other 10 spies spoke of foes too formidable for them to defeat. The people, greatly discouraged, attempted to stone Caleb and Joshua (Nm 14:10), and were prevented from doing so only by the sudden appearance of the glory cloud at the tabernacle. God swore in his wrath (Nm 14:21; cf. Heb 3:7–4:10) that, with the exception of Caleb and Joshua, none of that generation would enter the land of promise (Nm 14:21-35). He then struck down the 10 unbelieving spies (v 37). Presumptuously, and in spite of God’s express command to the contrary (Dt 1:42), Israel attempted to advance on the land, leaving Moses and the ark of the covenant in the camp. They were challenged by the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Israel remained in this general area with tribal families fanning out over the wilderness and settling around springs and oases (Dt 1:46). Numbers 15:1–21:20 relates the account of the 38 years of wilderness wandering. Much of this time was probably spent around Kadesh-barnea (Dt 1:46).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 15<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given (Nm 15:1-21). Also, the procedure to be followed when an Israelite committed a sin deliberately and defiantly was spelled out in terms of excommunication: there was no atonement for such an attitude (vv 22-31). A Sabbath violator was executed (vv 32-36), perhaps as an illustration of the foregoing legislation. Finally, to assist them in obeying God’s laws, the Israelites were instructed to tie blue tassels to their outer garments as reminders (vv 37-41).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 16<\/h5>\n<p>Korah challenged Aaron’s high priesthood, and Dathan, Abiram, and On challenged Moses’ leadership (vv 1-14). God, at Moses’ word, opened up the earth and swallowed the offenders (Nm 16:32; cf. Dt 9:6; Ps 106:16-18). Korah is regarded in the NT (Jude 1:11) as a classic example of a rebellious malcontent.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 26:11 states that Korah’s young children did not perish with him. Perhaps they became the ancestors of the “sons of Korah,” the sacred musicians of the temple who composed 12 Korahite psalms (Pss 42–49, 84–85, 87–88).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 17<\/h5>\n<p>God then instructed the leaders of each tribe to bring rods, 12 in all, to write the names of the tribes upon them (with Aaron’s name on Levi’s rod), and to deposit them in the tabernacle. The following day, Aaron’s rod had sprouted with blossoms and ripe almonds, thus vindicating Aaron’s special high-priestly status.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 18–19<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation was given. In 18:1-7, the full responsibility for the priestly service was given to the Aaronic priests—a very natural consequence of the preceding chapter. The Levites were to assist the Aaronic order (v 6). Since the tribe of Levi received no land inheritance, they were to be supported from the offerings of the people (vv 8-20).<\/p>\n<p>In 19:1-22 instructions concerning ceremonial impurity were given. When an Israelite became ceremonially unclean through contact with death (vv 11-16), God required that he be purified from his sin (vv 9, 17) by the sprinkling of specially prepared water upon him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 20<\/h5>\n<p>With Israel once again at Kadesh on the southern border of the wilderness of Zin in the first month of the 40th year of wandering, Miriam died and was buried (v 1). According to the encampment list in chapter 33, 18 encampments may have occurred for Israel since the nation had last been at this site (cf. 33:18-36).<\/p>\n<p>At this time the nation complained once again because there was little water (20:2). Moses, at God’s instruction, brought forth water from a rock (vv 8-11), but because of a gross infraction by Moses and Aaron on this occasion, God announced that they would not be permitted to lead Israel in the conquest of the land (vv 12, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The chapter closes with Edom refusing Israel passage across its territory (vv 14-21) and Aaron dying on Mt Hor on the border of Edom (vv 22-29) in the fifth month of the 40th year (33:38). Eleazar, Aaron’s son, assumed the office of high priest.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 21<\/h5>\n<p>After a quick victory over Arad (vv 1-3), Israel started south to encircle Edom. Becoming impatient with God and with Moses, the people expressed their disgust with God’s provision of manna. The Lord sent poisonous snakes to the camp, causing many to die. But at God’s command Moses fashioned a snake out of bronze and placed it atop a standard. All who looked to the bronze snake survived (vv 4-10). The bronze snake was preserved and later was destroyed by Hezekiah, the symbol having become by his time an idol (2 Kgs 18:4). Later still, Jesus drew an analogy between these wicked sinners looking to the bronze snake and being delivered and men looking to him by faith and being saved (Jn 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Leaving that fateful place, Israel journeyed into and up the Arabah, crossed the Wadi Zered in an eastern swing around Moab, finally crossing the Arnon into Amorite territory. Journeying north, they camped at Pisgah (Nm 21:10-20).<\/p>\n<p>At this point the conquest of the Transjordan begins. In quick succession Israel defeated Sihon of Heshbon (vv 21-31) and Og of Bashan (vv 33-35) and settled in the plains of Moab (22:1). This encampment was the scene for the remainder of the activities of Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua 1–3. In a real sense, one can say the wilderness wanderings were now over.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the place, then, to summarize the spiritual condition of Israel on the eve of the conquest of Canaan. Numbers makes it quite evident that the entire generation that left Egypt, with the exception of Joshua and Caleb, was to die in the wilderness because of its apostasy (cf. Am 5:25), unbelief, and general failure to keep covenant with God. None of the generation of male children born in the wilderness had been circumcised (Jos 5:2-9). Psalm 90 underscores Israel as the recipient of God’s wrath in the wilderness. It is in this pitiable spiritual condition that Israel arrived on the plains of Moab.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 22–24<\/h5>\n<p>Balak, king of Moab, frightened by Israel’s presence, joined with Midian to hire Balaam, the false prophet, to curse Israel. For gain, Balaam agreed (2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11), but God prevented him, causing him rather to bless Israel in his four oracular utterances (Nm 23:7-10, 18-24; 24:3-9, 15-19) and to predict the destruction of Moab, Edom, Amalek (24:20), the Kenites (24:21), and Asshur (24:24). With that, Balak and Balaam separated. Balaam, in collusion with Midian, agreed to counsel Israel to commit idolatry and immorality (31:16). And so, where Balak failed to turn the Lord against Israel, Balaam succeeded (ch 25).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 25<\/h5>\n<p>Israel sinned against God by idolatrous and immoral acts with the people of Moab (vv 1-3). In carrying out the command of God to destroy the reprobate Israelites, Phinehas killed Zimri and Cozbi, the latter being a daughter of one of the five kings of Midian (vv 4-14). This event provided the occasion for God to declare a holy war against Midian (vv 16-18; cf. ch 31).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 26<\/h5>\n<p>The Lord commanded Moses to take a roll of the men of the second generation who were capable of warring against Israel’s enemies. The total number came to 601,730 (v 51), a reduction of 1,820 men from the first count. With a smaller force than the first generation, Israel conquered Canaan, clearly indicating that Israel could have spared itself the years of wandering if only the nation had obeyed God 38 years before Kadesh. The Levites totaled 23,000 males a month old and upward (vv 57-62).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 27<\/h5>\n<p>At the request of the daughters of Zelophehad (cf. 26:33) that they be granted the right to inherit their father’s possessions since he had no sons, the Lord agreed that they could, using the occasion to give further laws of inheritance (vv 1-11).<\/p>\n<p>Reminded that he would soon die in Abarim, Moses requested that God appoint his successor. God selected Joshua, and Moses commissioned him (vv 12-23).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 28–30<\/h5>\n<p>Further priestly legislation regarding offerings for various occasions was given. God also instructed Moses to inform the people concerning vows. When a man made a vow, it was inviolable (30:2), but if a woman made a vow, the man (father, husband) responsible for her could nullify it if he felt that it was rash (vv 1-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 31<\/h5>\n<p>The account of the holy war declared against Midian in 25:16-18 is given. With Phinehas accompanying 12,000 warriors, Israel defeated Midian, killing Balaam along with the five kings and many male adults of Midian (31:1-8). The Midianite women and children were taken captive, but Moses commanded that all the male children and the nonvirgin women be killed (vv 9-18). One must not conclude that this war meant the end of Midian as such, for Midian later proved a formidable foe of Israel in the time of the judges (Jgs 6).<\/p>\n<p>After the battle, the warriors were instructed to purify themselves, their clothing, and the booty from the war before coming into the camp (Nm 31:19-24). Furthermore, they were instructed to divide the booty in half and to contribute one-fifth of one percent of their half to the high priest (“the Lord’s tribute”). The other half was divided among the people who had remained in camp, after the Levites received a two percent contribution (vv 25-31).<\/p>\n<p>Verses 32-47 give the tally of the booty after its division into two parts and the amount that was given from each part to Eleazar and the Levites. The tally is said by some to be too high to be authentic, but there is no evidence that disputes the recorded figures.<\/p>\n<p>In thanksgiving to God because no Israelite had been killed in the war (v 49) and to make atonement for themselves (v 50), the army officers brought a special offering of gold trinkets to Moses and Eleazar, which was placed in the tabernacle as a memorial (vv 48-54).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 32<\/h5>\n<p>At their request and on the condition that they aid the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh were allotted the Transjordan region. Moses earnestly besought the Lord to change his mind about not permitting him to enter the land of promise (Dt 3:23-27). But God would not let him.<\/p>\n<h5>Chapters 33–34<\/h5>\n<p>At God’s command, Moses kept a written record of Israel’s itinerary from Egypt to the plains of Moab. Here is biblical evidence of the Mosaic authorship of Numbers.<\/p>\n<p>The boundaries of the Promised Land were now given. The southern boundary would run from the southern tip of the Dead Sea, south of Kadesh-barnea up to the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish), and on to the Mediterranean Sea (34:3-5). The western boundary would be the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea itself (v 6). The northern boundary, not realized until the times of David and Solomon (2 Sm 8:3-12; 1 Kgs 8:65), was to extend from the Mediterranean Sea east to Hamath, at the head of the Orontes River (Nm 34:7-9). The eastern boundary was to be practically on a vertical line, with the Jordan Valley running north to the northern boundary (vv 10-12). The nine and a half tribes were to divide this area among themselves (vv 13-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then selected the men who were to bear the responsibility of dividing the land of Canaan among the western tribes after the conquest (vv 16-29).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 35<\/h5>\n<p>God instructed Israel to give 48 cities throughout the land on both sides of the Jordan to the Levites for a permanent possession (vv 1-8), since that tribe was not included in the land allotments to the other tribes. The number of cities each tribe was to give was to be determined by its size (v 8). Six of the Levitical cities, three on each side of the Jordan, were to be designated “cities of refuge” for the manslayer (v 6; cf. Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>Legislation concerning the manslayer follows (vv 9-34). If the slayer committed murder, the kinsman avenger had the right to fulfill his role as executioner (vv 16-21). If, however, the killing was unintentional, the manslayer was to flee to the nearest city of refuge for a trial. If found innocent of murder, he was assigned to remain within the city of refuge until the death of the high priest. If he left the city before then, the kinsman avenger was permitted to execute him (vv 22-34).<\/p>\n<h5>Chapter 36<\/h5>\n<p>Basing their question on the earlier law established in chapter 27, the leaders from Manasseh asked whether an heiress should be allowed to marry outside her tribe, with the accompanying transfer of property from one tribe to another that would ensue. God directed that an heiress would have to marry within her tribe (vv 1-12).<\/p>\n<p>The last verse of the book refers to all the laws given in the plains of Moab (26:1–36:12; cf. Lv 27:34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalTeaching\">Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Numbers God is revealed as the unchangingly faithful God of the covenant (Nm 23:19). This faithfulness to his covenant required that he both guide and care for his people and punish their sins against him. But no impediment was so great that God’s design to bring his people to the land of promise was thwarted (11:23).<\/p>\n<p>Both by his wrathful reaction to Israel’s sin and by the numerous priestly laws, God highlights his awesome holiness. The legislation expressly teaches that the person who approaches God must be clean. Even to look with unholy eyes upon the holiness of God meant death (4:20).<\/p>\n<p>His sovereignty over all of life is evident from the attention he displays over even the minutest aspects of life. The phrase “And the Lord said unto Moses” occurs over 50 times, and the words that follow in each case deal with all kinds of matters.<\/p>\n<p>As the God of the covenant, God’s “christological” character is also apparent. God’s blessing and faithfulness reflect the christological motif. Finally, Moses’ prophetic leadership (Acts 7:37-38) and intercessory ministry (e.g., Nm 11:2; 12:13; 14:19), in the Aaronic priesthood (e.g., ch 16), in the animal sacrifices (cf. 19:9; Heb 9:13), and in the symbols (the manna, the water, the bronze snake) foreshadow the future Christ.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s responses to God, the people depict all of human sinfulness and faithlessness. Israel’s wanderings illustrate the results of unbelief. The punishments of Israel prove the maxim of Numbers 32:23: “But if you fail to keep your word, then you will have sinned against the <span>Lord<\/span>, and you may be sure that your sin will find you out” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Numbers forcefully teaches that safety and blessing are to be found only in trust in the Lord. Only he is capable of bringing men and women to the place of rest (Heb 4:9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Deuteronomy, Book of; Exodus, Book of; Genesis, Book of; Leviticus, Book of; Moses; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NUMBERS, Book of Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, Numeri. The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4. Preview • Author • Background • Purpose • Content • Theological Teaching Author The question of the authorship o...","summary_en":"NUMBERS, Book of Fourth book of the English Bible. Its title is the English translation of the Latin Vulgate title, Numeri. The book takes this name from the fact that several rosters of various kinds are recorded in the book, specifically, the two army musters in chapters 1 and 26, the tribal camp and march arrangements in chapter 2, and the Levitical censuses in chapters 3 and 4. Preview • Author • Background • Purpose • Content • Theological Teaching Author The question of the authorship o...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35890,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37782,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Type","title_en":"Type","content_ro":"<h3>TYPE<\/h3>\n<p>The English word “type” is derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">tupos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which has the basic meaning of “a visible impression or mark made by a blow or by pressure.” In the Greek NT, the word occurs 16 times, with various meanings. A type is formed as a copy, print, or a form cast in a mold. In Acts 7:43 it is applied to “figures” of idols or false gods. A type can be a pattern according to which something is made (e.g., the tabernacle, Acts 7:44; Heb 8:5). It is an example or model, whether of evil to be avoided (1 Cor 10:6-11) or of good to be emulated (Phil 3:17; 2 Thes 3:9; 1 Tm 4:12; Ti 2:7; 1 Pt 5:3). It is like a form for pouring concrete, which determines both the shape and content of what is made.<\/p>\n<p>A type is also an entity found in the OT that prefigures one found in the NT. The initial one is called the “type” and the fulfillment is designated the “antetype.” Either type or antetype may be a person, thing, or event, but often the type is messianic and frequently refers to salvation.<\/p>\n<p> A type can be distinguished from a symbol in that a symbol is a timeless sign. It can refer to past, present, or future, while a type always foreshadows that which is to come.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples help to identify some biblical types and antetypes. The serpent lifted up on a pole in the wilderness to give healing to the Israelites was a type of Jesus being lifted up on a cross to give salvation to the world (Jn 3:14; cf. Nm 21:9). The Passover lamb (Ex 12:1-13) is a type of Christ (1 Cor 5:7). The rock from which Israel drank in the wilderness (Ex 17:6) prefigures Christ (1 Cor 10:3-4). In Romans 5:14 Adam is called “a type of the one who was to come,” that is, of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Hebrews is full of examples of types that represent the Messiah. All of the sacrifices ordained by the ritual law that God gave at Sinai typify some aspect of the person and work of Jesus. The blood that was sprinkled on the altar spoke of the blood of the one who was slain once for all (Heb 9:12-22).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TYPE<\/h3>\n<p>The English word “type” is derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">tupos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which has the basic meaning of “a visible impression or mark made by a blow or by pressure.” In the Greek NT, the word occurs 16 times, with various meanings. A type is formed as a copy, print, or a form cast in a mold. In Acts 7:43 it is applied to “figures” of idols or false gods. A type can be a pattern according to which something is made (e.g., the tabernacle, Acts 7:44; Heb 8:5). It is an example or model, whether of evil to be avoided (1 Cor 10:6-11) or of good to be emulated (Phil 3:17; 2 Thes 3:9; 1 Tm 4:12; Ti 2:7; 1 Pt 5:3). It is like a form for pouring concrete, which determines both the shape and content of what is made.<\/p>\n<p>A type is also an entity found in the OT that prefigures one found in the NT. The initial one is called the “type” and the fulfillment is designated the “antetype.” Either type or antetype may be a person, thing, or event, but often the type is messianic and frequently refers to salvation.<\/p>\n<p> A type can be distinguished from a symbol in that a symbol is a timeless sign. It can refer to past, present, or future, while a type always foreshadows that which is to come.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples help to identify some biblical types and antetypes. The serpent lifted up on a pole in the wilderness to give healing to the Israelites was a type of Jesus being lifted up on a cross to give salvation to the world (Jn 3:14; cf. Nm 21:9). The Passover lamb (Ex 12:1-13) is a type of Christ (1 Cor 5:7). The rock from which Israel drank in the wilderness (Ex 17:6) prefigures Christ (1 Cor 10:3-4). In Romans 5:14 Adam is called “a type of the one who was to come,” that is, of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Hebrews is full of examples of types that represent the Messiah. All of the sacrifices ordained by the ritual law that God gave at Sinai typify some aspect of the person and work of Jesus. The blood that was sprinkled on the altar spoke of the blood of the one who was slain once for all (Heb 9:12-22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TYPE The English word “type” is derived from the Greek tupos, which has the basic meaning of “a visible impression or mark made by a blow or by pressure.” In the Greek NT, the word occurs 16 times, with various meanings. A type is formed as a copy, print, or a form cast in a mold. In Acts 7:43 it is applied to “figures” of idols or false gods. A type can be a pattern according to which something is made (e.g., the tabernacle, Acts 7:44; Heb 8:5). It is an example or model, whether of evil to ...","summary_en":"TYPE The English word “type” is derived from the Greek tupos, which has the basic meaning of “a visible impression or mark made by a blow or by pressure.” In the Greek NT, the word occurs 16 times, with various meanings. A type is formed as a copy, print, or a form cast in a mold. In Acts 7:43 it is applied to “figures” of idols or false gods. A type can be a pattern according to which something is made (e.g., the tabernacle, Acts 7:44; Heb 8:5). It is an example or model, whether of evil to ...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56358,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:14-15<\/strong> Jesus was <em>lifted up<\/em> on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and <em>have eternal life<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:14-15<\/strong> Jesus was <em>lifted up<\/em> on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and <em>have eternal life<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:14-15 Jesus was lifted up on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and have eternal life.","summary_en":"3:14-15 Jesus was lifted up on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and have eternal life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83984,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:14-15<\/strong> Jesus was <em>lifted up<\/em> on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and <em>have eternal life<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:14-15<\/strong> Jesus was <em>lifted up<\/em> on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and <em>have eternal life<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:14-15 Jesus was lifted up on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and have eternal life.","summary_en":"3:14-15 Jesus was lifted up on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and have eternal life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111610,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:14-15<\/strong> Jesus was <em>lifted up<\/em> on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and <em>have eternal life<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:14-15<\/strong> Jesus was <em>lifted up<\/em> on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and <em>have eternal life<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:14-15 Jesus was lifted up on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and have eternal life.","summary_en":"3:14-15 Jesus was lifted up on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and have eternal life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139236,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:14-15<\/strong> Jesus was <em>lifted up<\/em> on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and <em>have eternal life<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>3:14-15<\/strong> Jesus was <em>lifted up<\/em> on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and <em>have eternal life<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:14-15 Jesus was lifted up on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and have eternal life.","summary_en":"3:14-15 Jesus was lifted up on the cross so that all people could understand the way of salvation, look to him in faith, and have eternal life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60694,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Bronze Snake","title_en":"The Bronze Snake","content_ro":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","summary_en":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67404,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88320,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Bronze Snake","title_en":"The Bronze Snake","content_ro":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","summary_en":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95030,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115946,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Bronze Snake","title_en":"The Bronze Snake","content_ro":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","summary_en":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122656,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143572,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Bronze Snake","title_en":"The Bronze Snake","content_ro":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","summary_en":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150282,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":11196,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Eternal Life","title_en":"Eternal Life","content_ro":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\n<p>The rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>In his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\n<p>The definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\n<p>John clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, <span>rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\n<p>The rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>In his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\n<p>The definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\n<p>John clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, <span>rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","summary_en":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":9056,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Death","title_en":"Death","content_ro":"<h3>DEATH<\/h3>\n<p>Cessation of life (physical death) or separation from God (spiritual death).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentView\">Old Testament View<\/p>\n<p>In the OT death was accepted as the natural end of life. The goal of an Israelite was to live a long and full life, produce many descendants, and die in peace with the children and grandchildren gathered about. The OT contains many protests against an early death (e.g., Hezekiah’s, 2 Kgs 20:1-11). An early death might appear to be the result of God’s judgment; hence, Job saw the need to vindicate his character prior to death (Jb 19:25-26). Only in Ecclesiastes 3:19-20 is outright pessimism expressed in the face of death—and that book probably shows considerable non-Hebraic influence.<\/p>\n<p>Death, although a natural ending to life, was never viewed as pleasant. Death cut one off from human community as well as from the presence and service of God. God may offer comfort in the face of death (Ps 73:23-28), but he is rarely portrayed as present with the dead, and that only in later biblical literature (Ps 139:8). For that reason, death was never viewed as the threshold to a better life.<\/p>\n<p>The relationship of sin to death is seen in the death penalty in the law of Moses. A serious offender was put to death. The punitive phrase “he shall be cut off” implied that although the nation went on living, the criminal was separated from it by death. The Israelites were warned that to disobey God’s commandments could bring premature death as a consequence of breaking fellowship with God (Dt 30:15-20; Jer 21:8; Ez 18:21-32).<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, as Jewish ideas of afterlife and resurrection developed more explicitly, so too did Jewish thinking about death. Death itself, not just a premature death, came to be seen as an evil result of sin (2 Esd 3:7; Ecclus 25:24). Sometimes all death is depicted as the result of the “first sin” (Adam and Eve’s disobedience). In other references, everyone dies as a result of his or her own sin. The first clear indication in Scripture of a resurrection of the dead and a final judgment or punishment occurs in the book of Daniel (Dn 12:2), one of the last OT books to be written. That teaching is echoed throughout the intertestamental period (2 Esd 7:31-44). During that time, it was believed that the soul survived death either in some immortal form (Wisd of Sol 3:4; 4:1; 4 Macc 16:13; 17:12) or awaiting the resurrection (1 Enoch 102). Some of those extrabiblical writings incorporated Greek ideas that the body was a burden to be gotten rid of—a notion foreign to Hebrew thought.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of resurrection and a life redeemed from death, however, set the stage for the NT revelation focusing on Christ’s resurrection and his conquest of death.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentView\">New Testament View<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, death is seen more as a theological problem than as a personal event. Death goes beyond the simple ending of physical life, which the authors accept almost without difficulty. Death is seen as affecting every part of a person’s life. God alone is immortal, the source of all life in the world (Rom 4:17; 1 Tm 6:16). Only as human beings are properly related to God’s life can they live. But it has been unnatural for people to be in personal communion with the divine source of life since sin was introduced into the world (Rom 5:12, 17-18; 1 Cor 15:22). When Adam separated himself from God, that separation brought death. Each human being has followed in Adam’s footsteps (Rom 3:23; 5:12), bringing death for everyone as the absolutely necessary result (Rom 6:23; Heb 9:27). Death, then, is not merely something that happens to people at the end of their lives; it is also the living out of their lives apart from fellowship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The extent of death’s domination is vast. It affects every aspect of culture. All of human life is lived under the shadow of the fear of death (Rom 8:15; Heb 2:15). Death reigns over all that is “of the flesh” (Rom 8:6). Anyone not living in relationship to Christ lives in a state of death (Jn 3:16-18; 1 Jn 5:12). The devil, who rules the world, is the lord of death (Heb 2:14). Death is sometimes personified as a demonic power at large in the world but finally brought to bay by Christ himself, the only one who could master it (1 Cor 15:26-27; Rv 6:8; 20:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Christ died, was buried, and rose again on the third day (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:3-4; 1 Thes 4:14). Through that historic event, the power of death was broken. The NT in various ways expresses Christ’s subjection to death in payment for sin. He became obedient to death (Phil 2:8); he died as a sacrifice for the sins of all (1 Cor 5:7; 2 Cor 5:15); and he descended into hades, the place of the dead (1 Pt 3:18-19). The major point of all such passages is that he did not remain dead but defeated the devil, took the power (keys) of death, and ascended in victory (Heb 2:14-15; Rv 1:17-18). Jesus Christ worked not for his own benefit but for those who commit themselves to him (Mk 10:45; Rom 5:6-8; 1 Thes 5:9-10). By accepting a death he did not deserve, Christ has broken the power of death for his followers.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian is thus delivered from “this body of death” (Rom 7:24) by the power of Christ. Salvation comes through being baptized into Christ’s death (6:3-4), and “dying with Christ” to the world and the law (Rom 7:6; Gal 6:14; Col 2:20). That is, the death of Christ is counted by God as the believer’s death. The rebellious world’s sin (Rom 6:6) and self-idolatry (living for oneself, 2 Cor 5:14-15) become things of the past. The death of Jesus for his people is the means by which his life is given to them (4:10). The result is that believers are separated from the world just as they were once separated from God. From the world’s point of view, they are dead; Christ is their only life (Col 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle John expressed it somewhat differently. Jesus came into the world to give life to the dead (Jn 5:24). That life-giving will not happen at the resurrection; it is already happening. All who commit themselves to Jesus pass immediately from death to life. Or, to put it another way, those who keep (obey) his words will never see death (8:51-52). The point is that all who are outside Christ are already dead, and those trusting in Christ are already enjoying life. The radical difference between the Christian and the non-Christian is a difference between life and death.<\/p>\n<p>Naturally, the NT writers knew that Christians die; their problem was to find words to explain the difference from non-Christian death. Believers who die physically are said to be “dead in Christ” (1 Thes 4:16). Or they are not dead at all, but merely “asleep” (1 Cor 15:6, 18, 20, 51; 1 Thes 4:13-15; cf. Jesus’ words, Jn 11:11-14). Although their bodies are dead, deceased believers are not separated from Christ; that is, they are not really dead. All the powers of death and hell cannot separate believers from Christ (Rom 8:38-39). For them, death is not a loss but a gain; it brings them closer to Christ (2 Cor 5:1-10; Phil 1:20-21). What is more, believers will share in Christ’s victory over physical death as well. Because he is the “firstfruits” of those rising from the dead (1 Cor 15:20; Col 1:18), those “in Christ” will rise “on the last day” to be with him, whole and complete.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, for those who do not belong to Christ, there is a final, total separation from God. At the last judgment, all whose names are not “written in the Book of Life” are consigned to a lake of fire, in the company of death itself and hades. That final separation from God is the “second death” (Rv 20:14). Christians, however, have been saved from death (Jas 5:20; 1 Jn 3:14). The second death has no power over those who are faithful to Christ (Rv 2:11; 20:6). Instead, they will live with God, in whose presence there can be no death, for he is life itself (21:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Intermediate State; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEATH<\/h3>\n<p>Cessation of life (physical death) or separation from God (spiritual death).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentView\">Old Testament View<\/p>\n<p>In the OT death was accepted as the natural end of life. The goal of an Israelite was to live a long and full life, produce many descendants, and die in peace with the children and grandchildren gathered about. The OT contains many protests against an early death (e.g., Hezekiah’s, 2 Kgs 20:1-11). An early death might appear to be the result of God’s judgment; hence, Job saw the need to vindicate his character prior to death (Jb 19:25-26). Only in Ecclesiastes 3:19-20 is outright pessimism expressed in the face of death—and that book probably shows considerable non-Hebraic influence.<\/p>\n<p>Death, although a natural ending to life, was never viewed as pleasant. Death cut one off from human community as well as from the presence and service of God. God may offer comfort in the face of death (Ps 73:23-28), but he is rarely portrayed as present with the dead, and that only in later biblical literature (Ps 139:8). For that reason, death was never viewed as the threshold to a better life.<\/p>\n<p>The relationship of sin to death is seen in the death penalty in the law of Moses. A serious offender was put to death. The punitive phrase “he shall be cut off” implied that although the nation went on living, the criminal was separated from it by death. The Israelites were warned that to disobey God’s commandments could bring premature death as a consequence of breaking fellowship with God (Dt 30:15-20; Jer 21:8; Ez 18:21-32).<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, as Jewish ideas of afterlife and resurrection developed more explicitly, so too did Jewish thinking about death. Death itself, not just a premature death, came to be seen as an evil result of sin (2 Esd 3:7; Ecclus 25:24). Sometimes all death is depicted as the result of the “first sin” (Adam and Eve’s disobedience). In other references, everyone dies as a result of his or her own sin. The first clear indication in Scripture of a resurrection of the dead and a final judgment or punishment occurs in the book of Daniel (Dn 12:2), one of the last OT books to be written. That teaching is echoed throughout the intertestamental period (2 Esd 7:31-44). During that time, it was believed that the soul survived death either in some immortal form (Wisd of Sol 3:4; 4:1; 4 Macc 16:13; 17:12) or awaiting the resurrection (1 Enoch 102). Some of those extrabiblical writings incorporated Greek ideas that the body was a burden to be gotten rid of—a notion foreign to Hebrew thought.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of resurrection and a life redeemed from death, however, set the stage for the NT revelation focusing on Christ’s resurrection and his conquest of death.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentView\">New Testament View<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, death is seen more as a theological problem than as a personal event. Death goes beyond the simple ending of physical life, which the authors accept almost without difficulty. Death is seen as affecting every part of a person’s life. God alone is immortal, the source of all life in the world (Rom 4:17; 1 Tm 6:16). Only as human beings are properly related to God’s life can they live. But it has been unnatural for people to be in personal communion with the divine source of life since sin was introduced into the world (Rom 5:12, 17-18; 1 Cor 15:22). When Adam separated himself from God, that separation brought death. Each human being has followed in Adam’s footsteps (Rom 3:23; 5:12), bringing death for everyone as the absolutely necessary result (Rom 6:23; Heb 9:27). Death, then, is not merely something that happens to people at the end of their lives; it is also the living out of their lives apart from fellowship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The extent of death’s domination is vast. It affects every aspect of culture. All of human life is lived under the shadow of the fear of death (Rom 8:15; Heb 2:15). Death reigns over all that is “of the flesh” (Rom 8:6). Anyone not living in relationship to Christ lives in a state of death (Jn 3:16-18; 1 Jn 5:12). The devil, who rules the world, is the lord of death (Heb 2:14). Death is sometimes personified as a demonic power at large in the world but finally brought to bay by Christ himself, the only one who could master it (1 Cor 15:26-27; Rv 6:8; 20:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Christ died, was buried, and rose again on the third day (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:3-4; 1 Thes 4:14). Through that historic event, the power of death was broken. The NT in various ways expresses Christ’s subjection to death in payment for sin. He became obedient to death (Phil 2:8); he died as a sacrifice for the sins of all (1 Cor 5:7; 2 Cor 5:15); and he descended into hades, the place of the dead (1 Pt 3:18-19). The major point of all such passages is that he did not remain dead but defeated the devil, took the power (keys) of death, and ascended in victory (Heb 2:14-15; Rv 1:17-18). Jesus Christ worked not for his own benefit but for those who commit themselves to him (Mk 10:45; Rom 5:6-8; 1 Thes 5:9-10). By accepting a death he did not deserve, Christ has broken the power of death for his followers.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian is thus delivered from “this body of death” (Rom 7:24) by the power of Christ. Salvation comes through being baptized into Christ’s death (6:3-4), and “dying with Christ” to the world and the law (Rom 7:6; Gal 6:14; Col 2:20). That is, the death of Christ is counted by God as the believer’s death. The rebellious world’s sin (Rom 6:6) and self-idolatry (living for oneself, 2 Cor 5:14-15) become things of the past. The death of Jesus for his people is the means by which his life is given to them (4:10). The result is that believers are separated from the world just as they were once separated from God. From the world’s point of view, they are dead; Christ is their only life (Col 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle John expressed it somewhat differently. Jesus came into the world to give life to the dead (Jn 5:24). That life-giving will not happen at the resurrection; it is already happening. All who commit themselves to Jesus pass immediately from death to life. Or, to put it another way, those who keep (obey) his words will never see death (8:51-52). The point is that all who are outside Christ are already dead, and those trusting in Christ are already enjoying life. The radical difference between the Christian and the non-Christian is a difference between life and death.<\/p>\n<p>Naturally, the NT writers knew that Christians die; their problem was to find words to explain the difference from non-Christian death. Believers who die physically are said to be “dead in Christ” (1 Thes 4:16). Or they are not dead at all, but merely “asleep” (1 Cor 15:6, 18, 20, 51; 1 Thes 4:13-15; cf. Jesus’ words, Jn 11:11-14). Although their bodies are dead, deceased believers are not separated from Christ; that is, they are not really dead. All the powers of death and hell cannot separate believers from Christ (Rom 8:38-39). For them, death is not a loss but a gain; it brings them closer to Christ (2 Cor 5:1-10; Phil 1:20-21). What is more, believers will share in Christ’s victory over physical death as well. Because he is the “firstfruits” of those rising from the dead (1 Cor 15:20; Col 1:18), those “in Christ” will rise “on the last day” to be with him, whole and complete.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, for those who do not belong to Christ, there is a final, total separation from God. At the last judgment, all whose names are not “written in the Book of Life” are consigned to a lake of fire, in the company of death itself and hades. That final separation from God is the “second death” (Rv 20:14). Christians, however, have been saved from death (Jas 5:20; 1 Jn 3:14). The second death has no power over those who are faithful to Christ (Rv 2:11; 20:6). Instead, they will live with God, in whose presence there can be no death, for he is life itself (21:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Intermediate State; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEATH Cessation of life (physical death) or separation from God (spiritual death). Old Testament View In the OT death was accepted as the natural end of life. The goal of an Israelite was to live a long and full life, produce many descendants, and die in peace with the children and grandchildren gathered about. The OT contains many protests against an early death (e.g., Hezekiah’s, 2 Kgs 20:1-11). An early death might appear to be the result of God’s judgment; hence, Job saw the need to vindi...","summary_en":"DEATH Cessation of life (physical death) or separation from God (spiritual death). Old Testament View In the OT death was accepted as the natural end of life. The goal of an Israelite was to live a long and full life, produce many descendants, and die in peace with the children and grandchildren gathered about. The OT contains many protests against an early death (e.g., Hezekiah’s, 2 Kgs 20:1-11). An early death might appear to be the result of God’s judgment; hence, Job saw the need to vindi...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9187,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Debt","title_en":"Debt","content_ro":"<h3>DEBT<\/h3>\n<p>Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.”<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so that borrowers never received the full value of the money. People could be ruined financially by heartless exaction of interest (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Another verb is usually translated as “increase” or “profit” (Lv 25:37), since lenders profited from others’ labor. Ancient Near Eastern interest rates on produce and goods might be as much as 30 percent of the loan per year; on money, as much as 20 percent. Clay tablets from Nuzi, an ancient town in northeastern Mesopotamia, indicate interest rates of even 50 percent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLawofMoses\">The Law of Moses<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic covenant given to Israel immediately after the exodus sought to eliminate extortionist practices from Hebrew life. Thus God’s revelation had many rules and restrictions relating to debt and credit in Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Protection for the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Portions of the legislative sections of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) regulated the practice of lending in a way that protected the poor and secured each person’s right to earn a living and support a family. Many popular Hebrew proverbs dealt with that theme. The positive thrust of the biblical laws was to ensure help for the financially needy, without interest. No personal profit was to be made at the expense of the poor (Ex 22:25; Dt 23:19-20); God was their special advocate. Thus, by lending without interest, the Israelites could demonstrate their reverence for God (Lv 25:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>That point was reemphasized 40 years later when Moses renewed the covenant with Israel just before their entrance into the Promised Land. God was the landlord, and his tenants were to respect his word. God promised the Israelites that if they would lend so as to alleviate human misery, they would be unusually blessed by the Lord (Dt 15:6; 23:19-20; 28:12). Interest could be charged to a foreigner not living under the Mosaic law, which was a condition parallel to commercial treaties prevalent in the ancient Near East.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient Israel, financial ruin was frequently brought about by poor harvests. Often they were taken as an indication that the relationship between God and his people was not right (Lv 26:14, 20). The wealthy were expected to help, not to add more burdens to those who suffered from poor harvests.<\/p>\n<h5>Violation of the Law<\/h5>\n<p>The law was so often violated that eventually exorbitant interest became a social plague, making the situation of debtors hopeless. Many of the fighting men who rallied around David early in his military career were “outlaws” unable to repay their loans and interest (1 Sm 22:2). The prophet Ezekiel called people to task for their failure to observe God’s commands about usury (Ez 18:5-18; 22:12). When Nehemiah returned from the exile to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, he brought charges against the government officials whose interest rates had enslaved the people (Neh 5:6-13).<\/p>\n<p>The Wisdom Literature, which included Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, added that those who acquired riches by usury would not profit in the long run, because God would give their profits to others who looked after the welfare of the poor (e.g., Prv 28:8). The prophet Amos gave a similar warning to corrupt merchants in Israel: “Because you trample upon the poor and take from him exactions of wheat, . . . you have planted pleasant vineyards, but you shall not drink their wine” (Am 5:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). In spite of such warnings, the law was often ignored, and burdensome interest charges were laid on borrowers who were already poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Pledges and Surety<\/h5>\n<p>When it was necessary to borrow, the law provided alternatives to the unfair practice of usury. When taking out a loan, a borrower would surrender some movable property as collateral to ensure repayment. That “pledge” represented a tangible sign of the debtor’s intention to repay the loan. Certain restrictions applied to such pledges. For example, a creditor could not take a widow’s clothes (Dt 24:17). Tools (such as millstones) or animals (such as oxen) necessary for daily life were forbidden as pledges (v 6). Clothing absolutely essential to the borrower (e.g., to keep warm) could be temporarily offered as a pledge, but the temporary token had to be returned before nightfall (Ex 22:26-27; Dt 24:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>In drastic circumstances, where there was no collateral, a debtor could pledge a son, daughter, or slave. The value of the child’s or slave’s labor could then be credited against both interest and principal. An account in the Bible of a widow’s two sons about to go into slavery shows how cruel the custom could be (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Pledging labor or their children’s labor was the only way slaves could pay off a debt when they had to borrow.<\/p>\n<p>A borrower could also have a wealthy friend assume responsibility as a cosigner on a loan and thus become the pledge, or surety. The book of Proverbs cautioned against standing surety for others, however, especially for strangers (Prv 6:1-3; 11:15; 17:18; 22:26; 27:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Sabbatical and Jubilee Years<\/h5>\n<p>Two legal provisions to curb the enslavement of people by long-standing debts were the sabbatical year and the jubilee year. The sabbatical year, or “year of release,” took place every seventh year. At that time debts were canceled and slates wiped clean (Dt 15:1-12; cf. Ex 21:2; 23:10-11; Lv 25:2-7). The law clearly forbade lenders to withhold loans to those in desperate need during a sixth year. Jewish tradition held strict injunctions against a lender trying to collect on a loan that should have been forgiven in the sabbatical year.<\/p>\n<p>Every 50 years Israel had its Year of Jubilee. In that year land reverted to its original owner if it had not already been redeemed by some relative. That provision prevented the buildup of landed estates by the wealthy few while the many poor suffered in slavery (Lv 25:13-17). Although the Mosaic law could not guarantee economic utopia, it sought to curb the greediness in human nature. It also aimed at providing everyone with an equal opportunity and a fresh start every 50 years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DebtintheNewTestament\">Debt in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT shows how various cultures handled the matter of loans and debts. There were Jewish people who adhered strictly to the Mosaic law and refused to charge their fellow Jews high interest. Hellenistic and Roman legal practices, however, penetrated parts of Jewish society.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus alluded to non-Jewish economic practices in his parable of a servant who jailed a fellow slave for not repaying a loan (Mt 18:23-35). The parable illustrates the ordinary Hellenistic and Roman custom of jailing or restraining such a person as surety. That practice forced a debtor to sell his property, to ask family and friends to cover the loss, or to sell himself into slavery. The parable of the talents (25:14-28) and the parable of the pounds (Lk 19:12-24), speaking allegorically about the kingdom of God, mention earning interest on money invested with bankers.<\/p>\n<h5>Economic and Theological Instruction<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul instructed Christians to “owe nothing to anyone” (Rom 13:8), which means at the very least that Christians should make good on loans promptly. On the other hand, a Christian’s economic activity should be characterized by kindness toward those in need, generosity, and willingness to help (Mt 5:42; Lk 6:35).<\/p>\n<p>The NT also presents a number of lessons in doctrine based on a figurative use of “debts” and “debtors.” Jesus once referred to sinners (Lk 13:2) with a word literally meaning “debtors” (v 4). In the Lord’s Prayer “debts” is paralleled with “sins” (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sin is seen as an enslavement (Jn 8:34), and all men and women as debtors to God. Redemption can be made only by God, who “gave his only Son” to set people free (3:16-18). The writer to the Hebrews showed that Jesus was made the surety of the new covenant (Heb 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul felt indebted to all people because of his own salvation, a debt he could pay by preaching the gospel (Rom 1:14-15). The NT teaches that all who receive the gospel are likewise in debt and therefore should devote themselves to serving others as a way of serving God (cf. 15:26-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Banker, Banking; Money.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEBT<\/h3>\n<p>Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.”<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so that borrowers never received the full value of the money. People could be ruined financially by heartless exaction of interest (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Another verb is usually translated as “increase” or “profit” (Lv 25:37), since lenders profited from others’ labor. Ancient Near Eastern interest rates on produce and goods might be as much as 30 percent of the loan per year; on money, as much as 20 percent. Clay tablets from Nuzi, an ancient town in northeastern Mesopotamia, indicate interest rates of even 50 percent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLawofMoses\">The Law of Moses<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic covenant given to Israel immediately after the exodus sought to eliminate extortionist practices from Hebrew life. Thus God’s revelation had many rules and restrictions relating to debt and credit in Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Protection for the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Portions of the legislative sections of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) regulated the practice of lending in a way that protected the poor and secured each person’s right to earn a living and support a family. Many popular Hebrew proverbs dealt with that theme. The positive thrust of the biblical laws was to ensure help for the financially needy, without interest. No personal profit was to be made at the expense of the poor (Ex 22:25; Dt 23:19-20); God was their special advocate. Thus, by lending without interest, the Israelites could demonstrate their reverence for God (Lv 25:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>That point was reemphasized 40 years later when Moses renewed the covenant with Israel just before their entrance into the Promised Land. God was the landlord, and his tenants were to respect his word. God promised the Israelites that if they would lend so as to alleviate human misery, they would be unusually blessed by the Lord (Dt 15:6; 23:19-20; 28:12). Interest could be charged to a foreigner not living under the Mosaic law, which was a condition parallel to commercial treaties prevalent in the ancient Near East.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient Israel, financial ruin was frequently brought about by poor harvests. Often they were taken as an indication that the relationship between God and his people was not right (Lv 26:14, 20). The wealthy were expected to help, not to add more burdens to those who suffered from poor harvests.<\/p>\n<h5>Violation of the Law<\/h5>\n<p>The law was so often violated that eventually exorbitant interest became a social plague, making the situation of debtors hopeless. Many of the fighting men who rallied around David early in his military career were “outlaws” unable to repay their loans and interest (1 Sm 22:2). The prophet Ezekiel called people to task for their failure to observe God’s commands about usury (Ez 18:5-18; 22:12). When Nehemiah returned from the exile to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, he brought charges against the government officials whose interest rates had enslaved the people (Neh 5:6-13).<\/p>\n<p>The Wisdom Literature, which included Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, added that those who acquired riches by usury would not profit in the long run, because God would give their profits to others who looked after the welfare of the poor (e.g., Prv 28:8). The prophet Amos gave a similar warning to corrupt merchants in Israel: “Because you trample upon the poor and take from him exactions of wheat, . . . you have planted pleasant vineyards, but you shall not drink their wine” (Am 5:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). In spite of such warnings, the law was often ignored, and burdensome interest charges were laid on borrowers who were already poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Pledges and Surety<\/h5>\n<p>When it was necessary to borrow, the law provided alternatives to the unfair practice of usury. When taking out a loan, a borrower would surrender some movable property as collateral to ensure repayment. That “pledge” represented a tangible sign of the debtor’s intention to repay the loan. Certain restrictions applied to such pledges. For example, a creditor could not take a widow’s clothes (Dt 24:17). Tools (such as millstones) or animals (such as oxen) necessary for daily life were forbidden as pledges (v 6). Clothing absolutely essential to the borrower (e.g., to keep warm) could be temporarily offered as a pledge, but the temporary token had to be returned before nightfall (Ex 22:26-27; Dt 24:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>In drastic circumstances, where there was no collateral, a debtor could pledge a son, daughter, or slave. The value of the child’s or slave’s labor could then be credited against both interest and principal. An account in the Bible of a widow’s two sons about to go into slavery shows how cruel the custom could be (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Pledging labor or their children’s labor was the only way slaves could pay off a debt when they had to borrow.<\/p>\n<p>A borrower could also have a wealthy friend assume responsibility as a cosigner on a loan and thus become the pledge, or surety. The book of Proverbs cautioned against standing surety for others, however, especially for strangers (Prv 6:1-3; 11:15; 17:18; 22:26; 27:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Sabbatical and Jubilee Years<\/h5>\n<p>Two legal provisions to curb the enslavement of people by long-standing debts were the sabbatical year and the jubilee year. The sabbatical year, or “year of release,” took place every seventh year. At that time debts were canceled and slates wiped clean (Dt 15:1-12; cf. Ex 21:2; 23:10-11; Lv 25:2-7). The law clearly forbade lenders to withhold loans to those in desperate need during a sixth year. Jewish tradition held strict injunctions against a lender trying to collect on a loan that should have been forgiven in the sabbatical year.<\/p>\n<p>Every 50 years Israel had its Year of Jubilee. In that year land reverted to its original owner if it had not already been redeemed by some relative. That provision prevented the buildup of landed estates by the wealthy few while the many poor suffered in slavery (Lv 25:13-17). Although the Mosaic law could not guarantee economic utopia, it sought to curb the greediness in human nature. It also aimed at providing everyone with an equal opportunity and a fresh start every 50 years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DebtintheNewTestament\">Debt in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT shows how various cultures handled the matter of loans and debts. There were Jewish people who adhered strictly to the Mosaic law and refused to charge their fellow Jews high interest. Hellenistic and Roman legal practices, however, penetrated parts of Jewish society.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus alluded to non-Jewish economic practices in his parable of a servant who jailed a fellow slave for not repaying a loan (Mt 18:23-35). The parable illustrates the ordinary Hellenistic and Roman custom of jailing or restraining such a person as surety. That practice forced a debtor to sell his property, to ask family and friends to cover the loss, or to sell himself into slavery. The parable of the talents (25:14-28) and the parable of the pounds (Lk 19:12-24), speaking allegorically about the kingdom of God, mention earning interest on money invested with bankers.<\/p>\n<h5>Economic and Theological Instruction<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul instructed Christians to “owe nothing to anyone” (Rom 13:8), which means at the very least that Christians should make good on loans promptly. On the other hand, a Christian’s economic activity should be characterized by kindness toward those in need, generosity, and willingness to help (Mt 5:42; Lk 6:35).<\/p>\n<p>The NT also presents a number of lessons in doctrine based on a figurative use of “debts” and “debtors.” Jesus once referred to sinners (Lk 13:2) with a word literally meaning “debtors” (v 4). In the Lord’s Prayer “debts” is paralleled with “sins” (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sin is seen as an enslavement (Jn 8:34), and all men and women as debtors to God. Redemption can be made only by God, who “gave his only Son” to set people free (3:16-18). The writer to the Hebrews showed that Jesus was made the surety of the new covenant (Heb 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul felt indebted to all people because of his own salvation, a debt he could pay by preaching the gospel (Rom 1:14-15). The NT teaches that all who receive the gospel are likewise in debt and therefore should devote themselves to serving others as a way of serving God (cf. 15:26-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Banker, Banking; Money.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEBT Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.” In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so tha...","summary_en":"DEBT Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.” In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so tha...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11835,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Faith","title_en":"Faith","content_ro":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","summary_en":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12838,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Spirit*, Fruit","title_en":"of the Spirit*, Fruit","content_ro":"<h3>FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT*<\/h3>\n<p>Expression taken from Galatians 5:22-23. As listed there, this fruit is the evidence one may expect from a life in which the Spirit of God is living and reigning. The fruit of the Spirit, as listed in Galatians 5, is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. “Love” is that outgoing, self-giving kind of action, not necessarily emotion, that characterized God himself when he loved the world so much that he <em>gave<\/em> his only Son (Jn 3:16). “Goodness” is the translation of a Greek word that includes the idea of generosity. The word “faith” refers usually to trust or confidence in someone or something. However, the word can also refer to that which causes trust and faith, namely faithfulness and reliability. Both meanings are in the use of the word here as another evidence of the Spirit-controlled life. Another fruit, translated “temperance” by the <span>kjv<\/span>, is the Greek word for self-control, that ability to hold oneself in, to keep oneself in check. It is significant that the Spirit is said to be the one responsible for this fruit. Since these qualities are the fruit of the Spirit, it is self-evident that legalism and obedience to law cannot originate or produce them.<\/p>\n<p>This fruit appears in a context within Galatians where Paul is emphasizing Christian freedom from obedience to the law as a meritorious means of being justified before God. He warns the Galatian Christians, who were in danger of returning to the law, that physical circumcision is an outward sign of a return to legalistic means of justification and that to attempt to obtain it this way is impossible (Gal 5:3). However, lest the Galatians overemphasize their freedom in Christ, Paul cautions that this liberty does not mean license to sin, an opportunity for gratifying the desires of the flesh, but rather an opportunity to continue as loving bondservants belonging to one another (v 13). Life in the Spirit means that one will not fulfill the lusts or desires of the flesh (v 16). Then Paul identifies both the works of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit. A person who is abstaining from the works of the flesh and is demonstrating the fruit of the Spirit in his life will be loving, joyful, peaceful, patient, kind, good, dependable, gentle, and self-controlled. These are not said to be gifts of the Spirit, however, but graces that will adorn the life that is under the Holy Spirit’s control.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT*<\/h3>\n<p>Expression taken from Galatians 5:22-23. As listed there, this fruit is the evidence one may expect from a life in which the Spirit of God is living and reigning. The fruit of the Spirit, as listed in Galatians 5, is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. “Love” is that outgoing, self-giving kind of action, not necessarily emotion, that characterized God himself when he loved the world so much that he <em>gave<\/em> his only Son (Jn 3:16). “Goodness” is the translation of a Greek word that includes the idea of generosity. The word “faith” refers usually to trust or confidence in someone or something. However, the word can also refer to that which causes trust and faith, namely faithfulness and reliability. Both meanings are in the use of the word here as another evidence of the Spirit-controlled life. Another fruit, translated “temperance” by the <span>kjv<\/span>, is the Greek word for self-control, that ability to hold oneself in, to keep oneself in check. It is significant that the Spirit is said to be the one responsible for this fruit. Since these qualities are the fruit of the Spirit, it is self-evident that legalism and obedience to law cannot originate or produce them.<\/p>\n<p>This fruit appears in a context within Galatians where Paul is emphasizing Christian freedom from obedience to the law as a meritorious means of being justified before God. He warns the Galatian Christians, who were in danger of returning to the law, that physical circumcision is an outward sign of a return to legalistic means of justification and that to attempt to obtain it this way is impossible (Gal 5:3). However, lest the Galatians overemphasize their freedom in Christ, Paul cautions that this liberty does not mean license to sin, an opportunity for gratifying the desires of the flesh, but rather an opportunity to continue as loving bondservants belonging to one another (v 13). Life in the Spirit means that one will not fulfill the lusts or desires of the flesh (v 16). Then Paul identifies both the works of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit. A person who is abstaining from the works of the flesh and is demonstrating the fruit of the Spirit in his life will be loving, joyful, peaceful, patient, kind, good, dependable, gentle, and self-controlled. These are not said to be gifts of the Spirit, however, but graces that will adorn the life that is under the Holy Spirit’s control.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT* Expression taken from Galatians 5:22-23. As listed there, this fruit is the evidence one may expect from a life in which the Spirit of God is living and reigning. The fruit of the Spirit, as listed in Galatians 5, is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. “Love” is that outgoing, self-giving kind of action, not necessarily emotion, that characterized God himself when he loved the world so much that he gave his only Son ...","summary_en":"FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT* Expression taken from Galatians 5:22-23. As listed there, this fruit is the evidence one may expect from a life in which the Spirit of God is living and reigning. The fruit of the Spirit, as listed in Galatians 5, is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. “Love” is that outgoing, self-giving kind of action, not necessarily emotion, that characterized God himself when he loved the world so much that he gave his only Son ...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14173,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Being and Attributes of God","title_en":"Being and Attributes of God","content_ro":"<h3>GOD, Being and Attributes of<\/h3>\n<p>Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16-17; 17:22-31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes is seen in his work of redemption through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>How does Scripture express the characteristics of God? First, in the divine names by which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1; Ex 3:6, 14-15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts of Creation, fall, Flood, Babel, and the exodus, and more fully in the various covenants God made with his people. To Israel, he identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh, he identified himself as the “God of Israel” or the “God of the Hebrews” (5:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>By the time the people of Israel had reached Mt Sinai, the revelation of God’s attributes in the biblical narrative had become more explicit: “The <span>Lord<\/span>, the <span>Lord<\/span>, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This summary is repeated elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18; Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>• Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>• Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAttributesofGod\">The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>The historic Christian confessions refer to various characteristics of God without calling them attributes or classifying them. The Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency toward classification, describing God as “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” The first four attributes qualify the others.<\/p>\n<p>Several ways of classifying the attributes have been suggested. Generally such schemes divide the divine attributes into pairs: negative and positive, natural and moral, absolute and relative, immanent and eminent, intransitive and transitive, quiescent and operative, antithetical and synthetical, or incommunicable and communicable. Roman Catholics prefer the distinction of negative and positive, or natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor the distinction between quiescent and operative attributes. Reformed and evangelical scholars usually distinguish incommunicable and communicable attributes. Karl Barth grouped the attributes under freedom and love, and then proposed pairs of attributes that reflect freedom-love or love-freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels given the groups of attributes, surprising agreement exists in the attributes listed under each group.<\/p>\n<p>This article will make a distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes without considering the classification itself as significant. No classification of God’s attributes is fully satisfactory. The <em>incommunicable<\/em> attributes emphasize the absolute distinctness of God, his transcendent greatness and exalted nature. Such attributes have little or no analogy in God’s creatures. The <em>communicable<\/em> attributes find some reflection or analogy in human beings created in God’s image. They indicate the immanence of God in relation to creatures. Yet all the attributes are God’s attributes; the distinction between God and man, between Creator and creature, is always basic.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncommunicableAttributes\">Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Acknowledging some diversity of theological opinion, the following attributes will be considered incommunicable: unity, spirituality, independence, immutability, eternity, and immensity. In addition, the incomprehensibility of God must be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>incomprehensibility<\/em> is sometimes included in lists of his attributes. It seems preferable to regard it as a description of human inability to understand God fully. Incomprehensibility is therefore not an attribute, although it is a given in every discussion of God. Through his revelation God is truly known by faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever fully understand any one of God’s attributes. Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibility should contribute to a spirit of humility in every consideration of God and his attributes (Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8-9; Mt 11:25-27; Rom 11:33-36; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 13:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>unity<\/em> is an expression of monotheism—the fact that the God of Scripture is the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of human imagination. This attribute is reflected in the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>spirituality<\/em> indicates that God is not physical and is invisible. Positively it means that God is personal, living, self-conscious, and self-determining. The invisible God cannot be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the second commandment forbids every visible representation of God (20:4). Because God is Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>independence<\/em> or self-existence indicates that he is not dependent upon anything outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his existence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God has “life in himself” (Jn 5:26) and “he himself gives life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25). To Israel, he revealed himself as the “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant people for his own possession. God continues to work out his will in the world, and even though he uses various means, his independence remains intact. Thus, he enters into fellowship with his covenant people, and he publishes the gospel through human agents.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immutability<\/em> or constancy expresses his changelessness and his faithfulness to himself, to his decrees, promises, and works. He remains forever the same true God who undergoes no change from within or from anything outside himself. And so in James 1:17 we read: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God’s oath to Abraham expressed his immutability so that his covenant people could be sure of the “unchangeable character of his purpose” (Heb 6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord would not “change his mind; for he is not a man” (1 Sm 15:29, <span>niv<\/span>; cf. Nm 23:19). “For I the <span>Lord<\/span> do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s explanation for not destroying sinful Judah; he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” Christians are warned not to be “led by diverse and strange teachings” (Heb 13:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>God’s immutability or constancy does not imply that he is static or immobile. He is a dynamic, living God who is constantly working (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind (Gn 6:6-7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their contexts, such figurative expressions show the constancy of a God who, in holiness and righteousness, always abhors sin and reacts against it. In his grace and mercy, he forgives the penitent, and he carries out his promises without fail (Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Jer 18:7-10; Eph 1:11). Thus, the constancy of God is significant in all human relationships with him, including petitions offered in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>eternity<\/em> indicates his transcendence over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He has no beginning or end; he does not undergo growth, development, or maturation. He existed before the creation of the world; he dwells now in eternity; he will continue as the eternal God even when history ends. Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt 33:27), “the King” (1 Tm 1:17), “the beginning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is above time and is timeless, time is his creation and history is the arena of his work. “When the time had fully come God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on a Friday and rose on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immensity<\/em> and <em>omnipresence<\/em> express his transcendence over space. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:23-24). Heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool, so he is not restricted to a temple building (Is 66:1; Acts 17:24). Yet God is immanent in this world and is actively at work in it to establish his kingdom. No one can hide from the omnipresent God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised, “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). Since Pentecost (Acts 2), the Holy Spirit is said actually to dwell within the bodies of believers (1 Cor 6:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CommunicableAttributes\">Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Many attributes of God can be classified under this heading, although it is sometimes difficult to say which biblical references to God should be regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of terminology is found in Scripture, with many synonyms. For convenience, the communicable attributes are often classified as intellectual, moral, and volitional.<\/p>\n<h5>Intellectual Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>knowledge<\/em> indicates that in a unique way God knows himself and all things possible and actual. <em>Omniscience<\/em> means that “he knows everything” (1 Jn 3:20). “Even before a word is on my tongue, lo, O <span>Lord<\/span>, thou knowest it altogether” (Ps 139:4), including the secret thoughts of a person’s heart. God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps 94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a source of comfort (139:1-5). All the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3); therefore, the Christian is told to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes renewal in knowledge to become more like Christ (Col 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>wisdom<\/em> indicates that he uses his knowledge in the best possible manner to achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The <span>Lord<\/span> by wisdom founded the earth” (Prv 3:19); his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn 50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ reveals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens awe and praise (Rom 11:33-36). Human beings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10; Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the wisdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>veracity<\/em> expresses his truthfulness and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faithful to himself, to his Word, and to his promises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1:5); therefore, his followers are to walk in the light (vv 6-7). Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6); hence, Christians are to walk in the truth and show faithfulness in their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Moral Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>The most comprehensive description of God’s moral character is his <em>goodness.<\/em> God deals bountifully and kindly with all his creatures. He is “good to all” (Ps 145:9). Jesus insisted that “no one is good but God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 106:1; 107:1; 118:1; 136:1; Jer 33:11) and are called upon to emulate this divine characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>love<\/em> is the heartbeat of the gospel. Perfect love flows among the Persons of the Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed himself as abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (Ex 34:6-7), and all his covenantal relations with Abraham’s descendants showed his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of God’s love was the sending of his Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who declared that “God is love,” pointed to the cross to indicate what that love really meant: “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8, 10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is called <em>grace<\/em> (Eph 1:6-8; 2:7-9; Ti 3:4). <em>Mercy<\/em> is God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to those in misery and distress. God is <em>longsuffering<\/em> or patient in his love; he gives time for repentance.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>holiness<\/em> depicts the moral purity and excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ holiness is applicable to each of the Persons of the Trinity: “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The root idea of holiness is to be separate or set apart. Because of his inherent holiness, God is distinct from everything impure or unholy. God alone is holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3, 9; 111:9; Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8). Objects, places, and people are called holy when set apart for the worship of God. Because God is holy, his people are called to holiness (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14-15). God’s discipline of his people is aimed at making them share his holiness (Heb 12:10). The holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as God’s chief attribute.<\/p>\n<h5>Volitional Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereignty<\/em> indicates the divine authority with which he rules the entire creation and in his sovereign good pleasure does whatever he wills. God is King over the entire creation, and he rules the destiny of human beings and nations. He restores his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen Lord revealed that all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him (Mt 28:18). Election to salvation in Christ is “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created the world and gave his law as the rule for his people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and judges. God is the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to obedient love (Dt 6:4-5; Mt 22:37-40; 1 Jn 5:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereign power<\/em> means that he is without bounds or limit in ability; he is <em>omnipotent<\/em> or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word, he created all things, and upholds “the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is nothing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn 18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gracious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk 1:37; 2 Tm 2:13; Heb 6:18). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom 1:16), for Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor 1:24). Hence, believers must come to know “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Glory<\/h5>\n<p>All the attributes of God are summarized in Scripture’s references to the <em>glory<\/em> of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty, and brilliance of God who dwells in unapproachable light are expressed by this indefinable term. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (Acts 7:2); God showed his glory to Moses (Ex 33:18-19; 34:6-7). The God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Father of glory (Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 19:1); the majesty and glory of God fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be for the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Human beings were created for God’s glory, and Christian believers are instructed to do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31), thus reflecting in themselves his inherent glory.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOD, Being and Attributes of<\/h3>\n<p>Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16-17; 17:22-31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes is seen in his work of redemption through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>How does Scripture express the characteristics of God? First, in the divine names by which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1; Ex 3:6, 14-15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts of Creation, fall, Flood, Babel, and the exodus, and more fully in the various covenants God made with his people. To Israel, he identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh, he identified himself as the “God of Israel” or the “God of the Hebrews” (5:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>By the time the people of Israel had reached Mt Sinai, the revelation of God’s attributes in the biblical narrative had become more explicit: “The <span>Lord<\/span>, the <span>Lord<\/span>, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This summary is repeated elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18; Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>• Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>• Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAttributesofGod\">The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>The historic Christian confessions refer to various characteristics of God without calling them attributes or classifying them. The Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency toward classification, describing God as “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” The first four attributes qualify the others.<\/p>\n<p>Several ways of classifying the attributes have been suggested. Generally such schemes divide the divine attributes into pairs: negative and positive, natural and moral, absolute and relative, immanent and eminent, intransitive and transitive, quiescent and operative, antithetical and synthetical, or incommunicable and communicable. Roman Catholics prefer the distinction of negative and positive, or natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor the distinction between quiescent and operative attributes. Reformed and evangelical scholars usually distinguish incommunicable and communicable attributes. Karl Barth grouped the attributes under freedom and love, and then proposed pairs of attributes that reflect freedom-love or love-freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels given the groups of attributes, surprising agreement exists in the attributes listed under each group.<\/p>\n<p>This article will make a distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes without considering the classification itself as significant. No classification of God’s attributes is fully satisfactory. The <em>incommunicable<\/em> attributes emphasize the absolute distinctness of God, his transcendent greatness and exalted nature. Such attributes have little or no analogy in God’s creatures. The <em>communicable<\/em> attributes find some reflection or analogy in human beings created in God’s image. They indicate the immanence of God in relation to creatures. Yet all the attributes are God’s attributes; the distinction between God and man, between Creator and creature, is always basic.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncommunicableAttributes\">Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Acknowledging some diversity of theological opinion, the following attributes will be considered incommunicable: unity, spirituality, independence, immutability, eternity, and immensity. In addition, the incomprehensibility of God must be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>incomprehensibility<\/em> is sometimes included in lists of his attributes. It seems preferable to regard it as a description of human inability to understand God fully. Incomprehensibility is therefore not an attribute, although it is a given in every discussion of God. Through his revelation God is truly known by faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever fully understand any one of God’s attributes. Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibility should contribute to a spirit of humility in every consideration of God and his attributes (Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8-9; Mt 11:25-27; Rom 11:33-36; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 13:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>unity<\/em> is an expression of monotheism—the fact that the God of Scripture is the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of human imagination. This attribute is reflected in the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>spirituality<\/em> indicates that God is not physical and is invisible. Positively it means that God is personal, living, self-conscious, and self-determining. The invisible God cannot be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the second commandment forbids every visible representation of God (20:4). Because God is Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>independence<\/em> or self-existence indicates that he is not dependent upon anything outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his existence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God has “life in himself” (Jn 5:26) and “he himself gives life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25). To Israel, he revealed himself as the “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant people for his own possession. God continues to work out his will in the world, and even though he uses various means, his independence remains intact. Thus, he enters into fellowship with his covenant people, and he publishes the gospel through human agents.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immutability<\/em> or constancy expresses his changelessness and his faithfulness to himself, to his decrees, promises, and works. He remains forever the same true God who undergoes no change from within or from anything outside himself. And so in James 1:17 we read: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God’s oath to Abraham expressed his immutability so that his covenant people could be sure of the “unchangeable character of his purpose” (Heb 6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord would not “change his mind; for he is not a man” (1 Sm 15:29, <span>niv<\/span>; cf. Nm 23:19). “For I the <span>Lord<\/span> do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s explanation for not destroying sinful Judah; he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” Christians are warned not to be “led by diverse and strange teachings” (Heb 13:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>God’s immutability or constancy does not imply that he is static or immobile. He is a dynamic, living God who is constantly working (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind (Gn 6:6-7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their contexts, such figurative expressions show the constancy of a God who, in holiness and righteousness, always abhors sin and reacts against it. In his grace and mercy, he forgives the penitent, and he carries out his promises without fail (Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Jer 18:7-10; Eph 1:11). Thus, the constancy of God is significant in all human relationships with him, including petitions offered in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>eternity<\/em> indicates his transcendence over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He has no beginning or end; he does not undergo growth, development, or maturation. He existed before the creation of the world; he dwells now in eternity; he will continue as the eternal God even when history ends. Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt 33:27), “the King” (1 Tm 1:17), “the beginning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is above time and is timeless, time is his creation and history is the arena of his work. “When the time had fully come God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on a Friday and rose on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immensity<\/em> and <em>omnipresence<\/em> express his transcendence over space. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:23-24). Heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool, so he is not restricted to a temple building (Is 66:1; Acts 17:24). Yet God is immanent in this world and is actively at work in it to establish his kingdom. No one can hide from the omnipresent God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised, “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). Since Pentecost (Acts 2), the Holy Spirit is said actually to dwell within the bodies of believers (1 Cor 6:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CommunicableAttributes\">Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Many attributes of God can be classified under this heading, although it is sometimes difficult to say which biblical references to God should be regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of terminology is found in Scripture, with many synonyms. For convenience, the communicable attributes are often classified as intellectual, moral, and volitional.<\/p>\n<h5>Intellectual Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>knowledge<\/em> indicates that in a unique way God knows himself and all things possible and actual. <em>Omniscience<\/em> means that “he knows everything” (1 Jn 3:20). “Even before a word is on my tongue, lo, O <span>Lord<\/span>, thou knowest it altogether” (Ps 139:4), including the secret thoughts of a person’s heart. God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps 94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a source of comfort (139:1-5). All the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3); therefore, the Christian is told to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes renewal in knowledge to become more like Christ (Col 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>wisdom<\/em> indicates that he uses his knowledge in the best possible manner to achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The <span>Lord<\/span> by wisdom founded the earth” (Prv 3:19); his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn 50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ reveals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens awe and praise (Rom 11:33-36). Human beings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10; Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the wisdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>veracity<\/em> expresses his truthfulness and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faithful to himself, to his Word, and to his promises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1:5); therefore, his followers are to walk in the light (vv 6-7). Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6); hence, Christians are to walk in the truth and show faithfulness in their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Moral Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>The most comprehensive description of God’s moral character is his <em>goodness.<\/em> God deals bountifully and kindly with all his creatures. He is “good to all” (Ps 145:9). Jesus insisted that “no one is good but God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 106:1; 107:1; 118:1; 136:1; Jer 33:11) and are called upon to emulate this divine characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>love<\/em> is the heartbeat of the gospel. Perfect love flows among the Persons of the Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed himself as abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (Ex 34:6-7), and all his covenantal relations with Abraham’s descendants showed his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of God’s love was the sending of his Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who declared that “God is love,” pointed to the cross to indicate what that love really meant: “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8, 10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is called <em>grace<\/em> (Eph 1:6-8; 2:7-9; Ti 3:4). <em>Mercy<\/em> is God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to those in misery and distress. God is <em>longsuffering<\/em> or patient in his love; he gives time for repentance.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>holiness<\/em> depicts the moral purity and excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ holiness is applicable to each of the Persons of the Trinity: “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The root idea of holiness is to be separate or set apart. Because of his inherent holiness, God is distinct from everything impure or unholy. God alone is holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3, 9; 111:9; Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8). Objects, places, and people are called holy when set apart for the worship of God. Because God is holy, his people are called to holiness (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14-15). God’s discipline of his people is aimed at making them share his holiness (Heb 12:10). The holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as God’s chief attribute.<\/p>\n<h5>Volitional Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereignty<\/em> indicates the divine authority with which he rules the entire creation and in his sovereign good pleasure does whatever he wills. God is King over the entire creation, and he rules the destiny of human beings and nations. He restores his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen Lord revealed that all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him (Mt 28:18). Election to salvation in Christ is “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created the world and gave his law as the rule for his people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and judges. God is the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to obedient love (Dt 6:4-5; Mt 22:37-40; 1 Jn 5:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereign power<\/em> means that he is without bounds or limit in ability; he is <em>omnipotent<\/em> or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word, he created all things, and upholds “the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is nothing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn 18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gracious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk 1:37; 2 Tm 2:13; Heb 6:18). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom 1:16), for Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor 1:24). Hence, believers must come to know “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Glory<\/h5>\n<p>All the attributes of God are summarized in Scripture’s references to the <em>glory<\/em> of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty, and brilliance of God who dwells in unapproachable light are expressed by this indefinable term. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (Acts 7:2); God showed his glory to Moses (Ex 33:18-19; 34:6-7). The God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Father of glory (Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 19:1); the majesty and glory of God fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be for the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Human beings were created for God’s glory, and Christian believers are instructed to do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31), thus reflecting in themselves his inherent glory.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOD, Being and Attributes of Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption. According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Ac...","summary_en":"GOD, Being and Attributes of Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption. According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Ac...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14572,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel","title_en":"Gospel","content_ro":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","summary_en":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19697,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20190,"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":21915,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22613,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judgment*, Last","title_en":"Judgment*, Last","content_ro":"<h3>LAST JUDGMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>Time at the end of history when God will judge the deeds of all humankind. In their preaching concerning the Day of the Lord, various OT prophets anticipated the time when God would wage war against all wicked nations and establish his rule in the eternal city of Zion (Is 4:2; 11:10; Jer 50:3-32; Jl 2:1-3; 3:9-16; Am 5:18-20; 9:11; Zep 1:7-18). The NT writers continue this theme, restating it in the light of the words and work of Jesus. He has been appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead (Acts 10:42; 17:31). Both believers and unbelievers must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what they have done with their lives (2 Cor 5:10; cf. Rom 14:10).<\/p>\n<p>The focus of God’s judgment is human behavior. Those faithful to the covenant will prosper, but those who are disloyal will perish. The prophet Habakkuk identifies the righteous person as the one who is faithful (Hb 2:4). NT writers state that one will be judged according to whether or not his deeds are pleasing to God (2 Cor 5:10; Rv 20:12). However, the NT also states that no one has met the perfect standards of God. All have sinned and therefore deserve to be punished (Rom 3:9, 23). The issue to be determined at the time of judgment is not one’s guilt but rather whether or not one has been acquitted. The NT speaks of this acquittal as justification and reconciliation (3:21-28; 5:1-21). The means of acquittal is the death and resurrection of Christ, for Jesus’ act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all people (5:18). The one who trusts in Christ is not condemned (Jn 3:16-18) and can enter the Day of Judgment with confidence (1 Jn 4:17). His name is written in the Lamb’s Book of Life (Rv 21:27). The unbeliever must face the Day of Judgment with no assistance. He will be judged by what is written in the books; that is, by what he has done (20:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Day of the Lord; Eschatology; Judgment; Judgment Seat; Last Days; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAST JUDGMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>Time at the end of history when God will judge the deeds of all humankind. In their preaching concerning the Day of the Lord, various OT prophets anticipated the time when God would wage war against all wicked nations and establish his rule in the eternal city of Zion (Is 4:2; 11:10; Jer 50:3-32; Jl 2:1-3; 3:9-16; Am 5:18-20; 9:11; Zep 1:7-18). The NT writers continue this theme, restating it in the light of the words and work of Jesus. He has been appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead (Acts 10:42; 17:31). Both believers and unbelievers must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what they have done with their lives (2 Cor 5:10; cf. Rom 14:10).<\/p>\n<p>The focus of God’s judgment is human behavior. Those faithful to the covenant will prosper, but those who are disloyal will perish. The prophet Habakkuk identifies the righteous person as the one who is faithful (Hb 2:4). NT writers state that one will be judged according to whether or not his deeds are pleasing to God (2 Cor 5:10; Rv 20:12). However, the NT also states that no one has met the perfect standards of God. All have sinned and therefore deserve to be punished (Rom 3:9, 23). The issue to be determined at the time of judgment is not one’s guilt but rather whether or not one has been acquitted. The NT speaks of this acquittal as justification and reconciliation (3:21-28; 5:1-21). The means of acquittal is the death and resurrection of Christ, for Jesus’ act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all people (5:18). The one who trusts in Christ is not condemned (Jn 3:16-18) and can enter the Day of Judgment with confidence (1 Jn 4:17). His name is written in the Lamb’s Book of Life (Rv 21:27). The unbeliever must face the Day of Judgment with no assistance. He will be judged by what is written in the books; that is, by what he has done (20:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Day of the Lord; Eschatology; Judgment; Judgment Seat; Last Days; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAST JUDGMENT* Time at the end of history when God will judge the deeds of all humankind. In their preaching concerning the Day of the Lord, various OT prophets anticipated the time when God would wage war against all wicked nations and establish his rule in the eternal city of Zion (Is 4:2; 11:10; Jer 50:3-32; Jl 2:1-3; 3:9-16; Am 5:18-20; 9:11; Zep 1:7-18). The NT writers continue this theme, restating it in the light of the words and work of Jesus. He has been appointed by God to be judge ...","summary_en":"LAST JUDGMENT* Time at the end of history when God will judge the deeds of all humankind. In their preaching concerning the Day of the Lord, various OT prophets anticipated the time when God would wage war against all wicked nations and establish his rule in the eternal city of Zion (Is 4:2; 11:10; Jer 50:3-32; Jl 2:1-3; 3:9-16; Am 5:18-20; 9:11; Zep 1:7-18). The NT writers continue this theme, restating it in the light of the words and work of Jesus. He has been appointed by God to be judge ...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23591,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Love","title_en":"Love","content_ro":"<h3>LOVE<\/h3>\n<p>Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Sexual love <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ahabah<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dod<\/span><em>)<\/em> is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, <span>rsv<\/span>), but more often “steadfast love” or “loving-kindness.”<\/p>\n<p>The connotation of this significant word is clear in Hosea 2:19-20: “I will make you my wife forever, showing you righteousness and justice, unfailing love and compassion. I will be faithful to you and make you mine, and you will finally know me as <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>); in Job 6:14-15, where kindness is compared with treachery; and in 1 Samuel 20:8, which speaks of covenanted kindness. This unshakable, steadfast love of God is contrasted with the unpredictable, capricious moods of heathen deities. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Hesed<\/span> is not an emotional response to beauty, merit, or kindness but rather a moral attitude dedicated to another’s good, whether or not that other is lovable, worthy, or responsive (see Dt 7:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>This enduring loyalty, rooted in an unswerving purpose of good, could be stern, determined to discipline a wayward people, as several prophets warned. But God’s love does not change. Through exile and failure it persisted with infinite patience, neither condoning evil nor abandoning the evildoers. It has within it kindness, tenderness, and compassion (Pss 86:15; 103:1-18; 136; Hos 11:1-4), but its chief characteristic is an accepted moral obligation for another’s welfare.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, response was expected. The Law enjoined wholehearted love and gratitude for God’s choosing and redeeming of Israel (Dt 6:20-25). This was to be shown in worship and especially in humane treatment of the poor, the defenseless, the resident alien, slaves, widows, and all suffering oppression and cruelty. Hosea similarly expected steadfast love among people to result from the steadfast love of God toward people (Hos 6:6; 7:1-7; 10:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Love for God and for “your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18) are thus linked in Israel’s law and prophecy. While much love of another kind lies within the OT, these are the major points: God’s loving initiative, the moral quality of love, and the close relationship between love for God with loving others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Of the Greek words available to describe love, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eros<\/span> (sexual love) does not occur in the NT. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Phileo<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection, occurs some 25 times, with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philadelphia<\/span> (brotherly love) five times, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philia<\/span> (friendship) only in James 4:4. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Storge<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection between relatives, appears occasionally in compounds. By far the most frequent word is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span><em>,<\/em> generally assumed to mean moral goodwill that proceeds from esteem, principle, or duty rather than attraction of charm. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is very similar in meaning to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span> in that both denote dedication. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> specifically means to love the undeserving, despite disappointment and rejection. The difference between <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phileo<\/span> is difficult to sustain in all passages. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is especially appropriate for divine love. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> was long believed to be a Christian coinage, but pagan occurrences have recently been claimed. The verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> was frequent in the Greek OT. Though <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span> has more to do with moral principle than with inclination or liking, it never means the cold religious kindness shown from duty alone, as scriptural examples abundantly prove.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>In a sinful and suffering world, Jesus’ divine love showed itself supremely in compassion and healing for the distressed and in redemptive concern for the alienated and the self-despairing. Hence, the kingdom Christ proclaimed offered good news to the poor, captives, blind, and oppressed (Mt 11:2-5; Lk 4:18), while the attitude of Jesus toward those ostracized, despised, or grieving over sin in some far country of the soul assured them of forgiveness and a welcome return to the Father’s house (Lk 15). Such forgiveness was free, its only precondition being readiness to receive it in repentance and faith.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the good news of divine love does impose its own obligation: to love God and to love others as God does (Mt 5:44-48). The first and greatest commandment in God’s law is “You shall love the Lord your God. . . . And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Mt 22:35-40, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Lv 19:18; Dt 6:5).<\/p>\n<p>The first commandment is not identical with, lost in, or only fulfilled through the second; it is separate and primary. What Jesus meant by loving God is indicated by his own habits of public worship, private prayer, and absolute obedience. Love for one’s neighbor is nowhere defined but everywhere illustrated. In the parable of the good Samaritan, “neighbor” is shown to mean anyone near enough to help, and love involves whatever service the neighbor’s situation demands. The parable of the sheep and goats shows love feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and the imprisoned. In the untiring example of Jesus, love heals, teaches, adapts instruction to the hearers by parable and symbolic language, defends those criticized or despised, pronounces forgiveness, comforts the bereaved, befriends the lonely. We are to love others as he has loved us and as we love ourselves. Such imaginative transfer of self-love does good without expecting return, never returns ill treatment, ensures unfailing courtesy even to the lowliest, sustains thoughtful understanding that tempers judgment.<\/p>\n<p>To Jesus, the outstanding sin was lovelessness, the willful omission of any possible good, passing by on the other side while others suffer, ignoring the destitute at one’s gate, withholding forgiveness. Lovelessness was made worse by self-righteousness, censoriousness, the religious insensitivity that ignores another’s distress to preserve some petty ritual regulation. In the end, obedience to or neglect of the law of love will determine everyone’s eternal destiny (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of Paul<\/h5>\n<p>The apostolic church quickly grasped the revolutionary principle that love is enough. Paul’s declaration that love fulfills the whole law is almost a quotation from Jesus. His exposition of various commandments against adultery, killing, stealing, and coveting is summarized in loving, because love can do no wrong to a neighbor (Rom 13:8-10). Ephesians 4:25–5:2 makes the same point another way: all bitterness, anger, lying, stealing, slander, and malice are to be replaced by tenderness, forgiveness, and kindness.<\/p>\n<p>Love is, for Paul, “the law of Christ,” supreme and sufficient (Gal 5:14; 6:2), and Paul neatly defines what alone “avails” in Christianity as “faith working through love” (5:6). He insists that the supreme manifestation of the Spirit that Christians should covet is “the more excellent way” of love (1 Cor 12:27–13:13; cf. Rom 5:5; Gal 5:22). Here, too, he contrasts love with five other expressions of religious zeal much prized at Corinth in order to show that each is profitless without love (1 Cor 13:1-3). He ends the chapter by comparing love with faith and hope, the other enduring elements of religious experience, and declares love to be the greatest.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s description of love in action includes liberality, acts of mercy, and hospitality; avoidance of revenge; sympathy; rejoicing with others; sharing of weakness, shame, or need; restoring, supporting, and edifying others, giving them all honor, kindness, forgiveness, encouragement; restraining criticism, even of the divisive, overscrupulous “weaker brother”—the list is almost endless. More generally, love is revealed as a quality of activity, of thinking, and of suffering (1 Cor 13:4-8). In brief, love does no harm and omits no good; it is God’s law.<\/p>\n<p>According to Paul, God showed his love for us in that Christ died for us. Because of his great love, he made us alive in Christ; in that love we live, by it we conquer, and from it nothing shall separate us (Rom 5:8; 8:32-39; 2 Cor 13:14; Eph 2:4; 2 Thes 2:16; Ti 3:4-5). Our love reflects the love first “poured into our hearts” (Rom 5:5), and it is directed toward Christ (1 Cor 7; 16:22; Eph 6:24) and toward others, whom we love for his sake.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of John<\/h5>\n<p>What John later recalled, and reflected upon, forms the crown of biblical teaching about love. For John, love was the foundation of all that had happened—“God so loved the world” (Jn 3:16; 16:27; 17:23). This is how we know love at all: Christ laid down his life for us (1 Jn 3:16). The mutual love of Father, Son, and disciples must be the fundamental fact in Christianity because God himself is love (4:8, 16).<\/p>\n<p>We know this by the Incarnation and by the cross (1 Jn 4:9-10). Thus we know and believe the love God has for us, and that love itself is divine (“of God”). It follows that “he who loves is born of God.” “He who does not love does not know God.” Such a person “is in the darkness,” “is not of God,” and “remains in death.” No one has ever seen God; nevertheless “if we love, . . . God abides in us” and we in God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s love is thus prior and original; if we love at all, it is “because he first loved.” Our love is directed first toward God, and John is exceedingly searching in his tests of that Godward love. It demands that we “love not the world,” that we “keep his word [and] his commandments,” and that we love our Christian brothers and sisters. This commandment we received from Christ, “that he who loves God should love his brother also,” for “if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.” Twelve times John stressed the duty of mutual loyalty and love. Indeed, if one closes his heart against his brother or sister, “how does God’s love abide in him?”<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis upon the mutual love of Christians has been held a serious limitation of the love Jesus required. “Your brother” appears to have supplanted “your neighbor.” In this respect the commandment given in the upper room (Jn 13:34) is “new” compared with that in Matthew 22:39 (citing Lv 19:18), and the circumstances explain why. The night on which Jesus was betrayed was shadowed by the surrounding world’s hostility, the imminent crucifixion, and the defection of Judas. All the future depended upon the mutual loyalty of the 11 disciples, standing together under social pressure. By the time of John’s letter, new defections had rent the church. A perversion of the gospel called Gnosticism, essentially intellectualist, proud, “giving no heed to love” (Ignatius), had drawn away leaders and adherents (1 Jn 2:19, 26). Once again mutual loyalty was all-important, and John wrote expressly to consolidate and maintain the apostolic fellowship (1 Jn 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, love for one’s fellow Christians does not exclude, but instead leads on to, a wider love (cf. 2 Pt 1:7). John insists that God loved the whole world (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:14). Moreover, if love fails within the Christian fellowship, it certainly will not flourish beyond it but evaporate in mere words (1 Jn 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In countering the loveless conceit of Gnostic Christianity, John’s concern was with the basic commandment of love to God and people as at once the criterion and the consummation of true Christian life. He does not, therefore, detail the many-sided expressions of love. For description of love in action, his mind recalls Christ’s words about “keeping commandments” and “laying down life” in sacrifice (Jn 15:10, 13; 1 Jn 3:16), and he mentioned especially love’s noticing a brother’s need, and so sharing this world’s goods (v 17). Terse as these expressions are, they contain the heart of Christian love. John’s forthright realism in testing all religious claims ensures that for him love could be no vague sentimentalism.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian ideal can only be socially fulfilled within a disciple band, a divine kingdom, the Father’s family, the Christian fellowship. In Scripture, love is no abstract idea, conceived to provide a self-explanatory, self-motivating “norm” to resolve the problem in every moral situation. It is rooted in the divine nature, expressed in the coming and death of Christ, experienced in salvation, and so kindled within the saved. Thus it is central, essential, and indispensable to Christianity. For God is love.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Mercy; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LOVE<\/h3>\n<p>Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Sexual love <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ahabah<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dod<\/span><em>)<\/em> is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, <span>rsv<\/span>), but more often “steadfast love” or “loving-kindness.”<\/p>\n<p>The connotation of this significant word is clear in Hosea 2:19-20: “I will make you my wife forever, showing you righteousness and justice, unfailing love and compassion. I will be faithful to you and make you mine, and you will finally know me as <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>); in Job 6:14-15, where kindness is compared with treachery; and in 1 Samuel 20:8, which speaks of covenanted kindness. This unshakable, steadfast love of God is contrasted with the unpredictable, capricious moods of heathen deities. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Hesed<\/span> is not an emotional response to beauty, merit, or kindness but rather a moral attitude dedicated to another’s good, whether or not that other is lovable, worthy, or responsive (see Dt 7:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>This enduring loyalty, rooted in an unswerving purpose of good, could be stern, determined to discipline a wayward people, as several prophets warned. But God’s love does not change. Through exile and failure it persisted with infinite patience, neither condoning evil nor abandoning the evildoers. It has within it kindness, tenderness, and compassion (Pss 86:15; 103:1-18; 136; Hos 11:1-4), but its chief characteristic is an accepted moral obligation for another’s welfare.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, response was expected. The Law enjoined wholehearted love and gratitude for God’s choosing and redeeming of Israel (Dt 6:20-25). This was to be shown in worship and especially in humane treatment of the poor, the defenseless, the resident alien, slaves, widows, and all suffering oppression and cruelty. Hosea similarly expected steadfast love among people to result from the steadfast love of God toward people (Hos 6:6; 7:1-7; 10:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Love for God and for “your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18) are thus linked in Israel’s law and prophecy. While much love of another kind lies within the OT, these are the major points: God’s loving initiative, the moral quality of love, and the close relationship between love for God with loving others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Of the Greek words available to describe love, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eros<\/span> (sexual love) does not occur in the NT. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Phileo<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection, occurs some 25 times, with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philadelphia<\/span> (brotherly love) five times, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philia<\/span> (friendship) only in James 4:4. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Storge<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection between relatives, appears occasionally in compounds. By far the most frequent word is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span><em>,<\/em> generally assumed to mean moral goodwill that proceeds from esteem, principle, or duty rather than attraction of charm. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is very similar in meaning to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span> in that both denote dedication. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> specifically means to love the undeserving, despite disappointment and rejection. The difference between <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phileo<\/span> is difficult to sustain in all passages. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is especially appropriate for divine love. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> was long believed to be a Christian coinage, but pagan occurrences have recently been claimed. The verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> was frequent in the Greek OT. Though <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span> has more to do with moral principle than with inclination or liking, it never means the cold religious kindness shown from duty alone, as scriptural examples abundantly prove.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>In a sinful and suffering world, Jesus’ divine love showed itself supremely in compassion and healing for the distressed and in redemptive concern for the alienated and the self-despairing. Hence, the kingdom Christ proclaimed offered good news to the poor, captives, blind, and oppressed (Mt 11:2-5; Lk 4:18), while the attitude of Jesus toward those ostracized, despised, or grieving over sin in some far country of the soul assured them of forgiveness and a welcome return to the Father’s house (Lk 15). Such forgiveness was free, its only precondition being readiness to receive it in repentance and faith.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the good news of divine love does impose its own obligation: to love God and to love others as God does (Mt 5:44-48). The first and greatest commandment in God’s law is “You shall love the Lord your God. . . . And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Mt 22:35-40, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Lv 19:18; Dt 6:5).<\/p>\n<p>The first commandment is not identical with, lost in, or only fulfilled through the second; it is separate and primary. What Jesus meant by loving God is indicated by his own habits of public worship, private prayer, and absolute obedience. Love for one’s neighbor is nowhere defined but everywhere illustrated. In the parable of the good Samaritan, “neighbor” is shown to mean anyone near enough to help, and love involves whatever service the neighbor’s situation demands. The parable of the sheep and goats shows love feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and the imprisoned. In the untiring example of Jesus, love heals, teaches, adapts instruction to the hearers by parable and symbolic language, defends those criticized or despised, pronounces forgiveness, comforts the bereaved, befriends the lonely. We are to love others as he has loved us and as we love ourselves. Such imaginative transfer of self-love does good without expecting return, never returns ill treatment, ensures unfailing courtesy even to the lowliest, sustains thoughtful understanding that tempers judgment.<\/p>\n<p>To Jesus, the outstanding sin was lovelessness, the willful omission of any possible good, passing by on the other side while others suffer, ignoring the destitute at one’s gate, withholding forgiveness. Lovelessness was made worse by self-righteousness, censoriousness, the religious insensitivity that ignores another’s distress to preserve some petty ritual regulation. In the end, obedience to or neglect of the law of love will determine everyone’s eternal destiny (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of Paul<\/h5>\n<p>The apostolic church quickly grasped the revolutionary principle that love is enough. Paul’s declaration that love fulfills the whole law is almost a quotation from Jesus. His exposition of various commandments against adultery, killing, stealing, and coveting is summarized in loving, because love can do no wrong to a neighbor (Rom 13:8-10). Ephesians 4:25–5:2 makes the same point another way: all bitterness, anger, lying, stealing, slander, and malice are to be replaced by tenderness, forgiveness, and kindness.<\/p>\n<p>Love is, for Paul, “the law of Christ,” supreme and sufficient (Gal 5:14; 6:2), and Paul neatly defines what alone “avails” in Christianity as “faith working through love” (5:6). He insists that the supreme manifestation of the Spirit that Christians should covet is “the more excellent way” of love (1 Cor 12:27–13:13; cf. Rom 5:5; Gal 5:22). Here, too, he contrasts love with five other expressions of religious zeal much prized at Corinth in order to show that each is profitless without love (1 Cor 13:1-3). He ends the chapter by comparing love with faith and hope, the other enduring elements of religious experience, and declares love to be the greatest.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s description of love in action includes liberality, acts of mercy, and hospitality; avoidance of revenge; sympathy; rejoicing with others; sharing of weakness, shame, or need; restoring, supporting, and edifying others, giving them all honor, kindness, forgiveness, encouragement; restraining criticism, even of the divisive, overscrupulous “weaker brother”—the list is almost endless. More generally, love is revealed as a quality of activity, of thinking, and of suffering (1 Cor 13:4-8). In brief, love does no harm and omits no good; it is God’s law.<\/p>\n<p>According to Paul, God showed his love for us in that Christ died for us. Because of his great love, he made us alive in Christ; in that love we live, by it we conquer, and from it nothing shall separate us (Rom 5:8; 8:32-39; 2 Cor 13:14; Eph 2:4; 2 Thes 2:16; Ti 3:4-5). Our love reflects the love first “poured into our hearts” (Rom 5:5), and it is directed toward Christ (1 Cor 7; 16:22; Eph 6:24) and toward others, whom we love for his sake.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of John<\/h5>\n<p>What John later recalled, and reflected upon, forms the crown of biblical teaching about love. For John, love was the foundation of all that had happened—“God so loved the world” (Jn 3:16; 16:27; 17:23). This is how we know love at all: Christ laid down his life for us (1 Jn 3:16). The mutual love of Father, Son, and disciples must be the fundamental fact in Christianity because God himself is love (4:8, 16).<\/p>\n<p>We know this by the Incarnation and by the cross (1 Jn 4:9-10). Thus we know and believe the love God has for us, and that love itself is divine (“of God”). It follows that “he who loves is born of God.” “He who does not love does not know God.” Such a person “is in the darkness,” “is not of God,” and “remains in death.” No one has ever seen God; nevertheless “if we love, . . . God abides in us” and we in God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s love is thus prior and original; if we love at all, it is “because he first loved.” Our love is directed first toward God, and John is exceedingly searching in his tests of that Godward love. It demands that we “love not the world,” that we “keep his word [and] his commandments,” and that we love our Christian brothers and sisters. This commandment we received from Christ, “that he who loves God should love his brother also,” for “if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.” Twelve times John stressed the duty of mutual loyalty and love. Indeed, if one closes his heart against his brother or sister, “how does God’s love abide in him?”<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis upon the mutual love of Christians has been held a serious limitation of the love Jesus required. “Your brother” appears to have supplanted “your neighbor.” In this respect the commandment given in the upper room (Jn 13:34) is “new” compared with that in Matthew 22:39 (citing Lv 19:18), and the circumstances explain why. The night on which Jesus was betrayed was shadowed by the surrounding world’s hostility, the imminent crucifixion, and the defection of Judas. All the future depended upon the mutual loyalty of the 11 disciples, standing together under social pressure. By the time of John’s letter, new defections had rent the church. A perversion of the gospel called Gnosticism, essentially intellectualist, proud, “giving no heed to love” (Ignatius), had drawn away leaders and adherents (1 Jn 2:19, 26). Once again mutual loyalty was all-important, and John wrote expressly to consolidate and maintain the apostolic fellowship (1 Jn 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, love for one’s fellow Christians does not exclude, but instead leads on to, a wider love (cf. 2 Pt 1:7). John insists that God loved the whole world (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:14). Moreover, if love fails within the Christian fellowship, it certainly will not flourish beyond it but evaporate in mere words (1 Jn 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In countering the loveless conceit of Gnostic Christianity, John’s concern was with the basic commandment of love to God and people as at once the criterion and the consummation of true Christian life. He does not, therefore, detail the many-sided expressions of love. For description of love in action, his mind recalls Christ’s words about “keeping commandments” and “laying down life” in sacrifice (Jn 15:10, 13; 1 Jn 3:16), and he mentioned especially love’s noticing a brother’s need, and so sharing this world’s goods (v 17). Terse as these expressions are, they contain the heart of Christian love. John’s forthright realism in testing all religious claims ensures that for him love could be no vague sentimentalism.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian ideal can only be socially fulfilled within a disciple band, a divine kingdom, the Father’s family, the Christian fellowship. In Scripture, love is no abstract idea, conceived to provide a self-explanatory, self-motivating “norm” to resolve the problem in every moral situation. It is rooted in the divine nature, expressed in the coming and death of Christ, experienced in salvation, and so kindled within the saved. Thus it is central, essential, and indispensable to Christianity. For God is love.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Mercy; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LOVE Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term. In the Old Testament Sexual love (ahabah and dod) is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word hesed, which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, rsv), but more often “steadfast love” or “lovin...","summary_en":"LOVE Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term. In the Old Testament Sexual love (ahabah and dod) is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word hesed, which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, rsv), but more often “steadfast love” or “lovin...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28470,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Begotten*, Only","title_en":"Begotten*, Only","content_ro":"<h3>ONLY BEGOTTEN*<\/h3>\n<p>Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT).<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jesus (Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). Three of the other occurrences are of an only son or daughter (Lk 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; cf. Jgs 11:34 in the LXX). Because of its frequent use for an only child, the word often conveys the idea of something especially favored or precious. The remaining non-Johannine reference, in Hebrews 11:17, is to Isaac as Abraham’s “favored” or “unique” son. Isaac was not Abraham’s “only begotten,” since he had other children, but Isaac was his favored and unique son fulfilling God’s promise. In the Septuagint for Psalm 22:20 and 35:17, the psalmist, in his plea for deliverance, even uses this word of his own soul as that which is of great value. The Hebrew word that stands behind each of these OT texts also means “only” and does not carry any idea of birth.<\/p>\n<p>Where the word is used of Jesus, its meaning is likewise not “only begotten” but “only” or “unique.” The word is used with “son” and should be understood as God’s <em>only<\/em> Son, indicating both God’s favor toward him and his uniqueness (Jn 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). The statement at the baptism and transfiguration of Jesus in the Synoptics (“This is my beloved son”) expresses virtually the same idea. In fact, the word “beloved” is used in the Septuagint as an equivalent to the word “only” to translate the same Hebrew word. In John 1:14 the word “only” is used by itself to stress that the incarnate Word comes as a unique one from the Father. The final reference (Jn 1:18) is especially interesting because of the fact that some texts read “the only son” while others read “the only God.” Because scribes could easily have written “only son” due to their familiarity with the other texts in John and because of the superiority of the texts that read “only God,” this latter reading is preferred. The attitude expressed toward the incarnate Word is the highest possible. No one has ever seen God, but the unique (or only) God who is in the bosom of the Father has revealed him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ONLY BEGOTTEN*<\/h3>\n<p>Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT).<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jesus (Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). Three of the other occurrences are of an only son or daughter (Lk 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; cf. Jgs 11:34 in the LXX). Because of its frequent use for an only child, the word often conveys the idea of something especially favored or precious. The remaining non-Johannine reference, in Hebrews 11:17, is to Isaac as Abraham’s “favored” or “unique” son. Isaac was not Abraham’s “only begotten,” since he had other children, but Isaac was his favored and unique son fulfilling God’s promise. In the Septuagint for Psalm 22:20 and 35:17, the psalmist, in his plea for deliverance, even uses this word of his own soul as that which is of great value. The Hebrew word that stands behind each of these OT texts also means “only” and does not carry any idea of birth.<\/p>\n<p>Where the word is used of Jesus, its meaning is likewise not “only begotten” but “only” or “unique.” The word is used with “son” and should be understood as God’s <em>only<\/em> Son, indicating both God’s favor toward him and his uniqueness (Jn 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). The statement at the baptism and transfiguration of Jesus in the Synoptics (“This is my beloved son”) expresses virtually the same idea. In fact, the word “beloved” is used in the Septuagint as an equivalent to the word “only” to translate the same Hebrew word. In John 1:14 the word “only” is used by itself to stress that the incarnate Word comes as a unique one from the Father. The final reference (Jn 1:18) is especially interesting because of the fact that some texts read “the only son” while others read “the only God.” Because scribes could easily have written “only son” due to their familiarity with the other texts in John and because of the superiority of the texts that read “only God,” this latter reading is preferred. The attitude expressed toward the incarnate Word is the highest possible. No one has ever seen God, but the unique (or only) God who is in the bosom of the Father has revealed him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ONLY BEGOTTEN* Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT). The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jes...","summary_en":"ONLY BEGOTTEN* Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT). The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jes...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31433,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Promise","title_en":"Promise","content_ro":"<h3>PROMISE<\/h3>\n<p>Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofPromise\">Types of Promise<\/p>\n<p>In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who gives them is totally able to perform that which he has promised (Rom 4:21).<\/p>\n<p>Divine promises in Scripture assure their recipients of many spiritual and temporal benefits, including sonship (2 Cor 6:16–7:1), forgiveness of sin (1 Jn 1:9), answer to prayer (Lk 11:9), deliverance from temptations (1 Cor 10:13), sustaining grace for difficult times (2 Cor 12:9), provision for all needs (Phil 4:19), reward for obedience (Jas 1:12), and eternal life (Lk 18:29-30; Jn 3:16; Rom 6:22-23). God’s promises are certain and sure, but participation in their blessing often requires that certain conditions on which they are predicated be met. Divine promises also are not always guarantees of blessing. Indeed, there are promises announcing the certainty of judgment on those who refuse to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus (2 Thes 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the promises of God, which have subjective and individual application to many different people in widely different times and places, there are a great many promises that pertain to the programmatic unfolding of God’s plan of redemption in a grand procession of historical events. These promises have neither repeated applications nor conditional natures. In such cases, promise becomes nearly synonymous with prophecy, and promises of this type, along with their subsequent fulfillment, are intricately intertwined in the entire fabric of redemptive history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PromisesintheOldTestament\">Promises in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The highlights of the promise theme in the OT can be seen in the promise of what is often termed the protevangelium (i.e., the first announcement of the gospel) given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden immediately after the fall into sin (Gn 3:15). Subsequent promises are the covenants God made with Abraham (chs 12; 15; 17) and with David (2 Sm 7), followed by the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31).<\/p>\n<h5>The Protevangelium<\/h5>\n<p>Genesis 3:15b says: “Your [Satan’s] offspring and her [Eve’s] offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (<span>nlt<\/span>). This statement is a promise that at some future time the offspring of the woman will crush Satan. The offspring of the woman is individualized in the “he” of the last phrase. “He” shall strike you (i.e., Satan) on the head, although Satan will inflict a wound on the offspring of the woman. Here, then, is the promise that gives Adam and Eve, as well as their descendants, the basis to expect the eventual destruction of their adversary Satan through their offspring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>In Genesis 12:1-7 Abraham is told to leave his people and country and to go to a land that the Lord would show to him. God, in turn, promises him that (1) his offspring would become a great nation; (2) he would be blessed and his name made great; (3) through him other nations would be blessed; and (4) the land of Canaan would be given to his descendants. Of particular significance among these promises given to Abraham is that through his offspring he will bless many nations. This promise is repeated five times in the book of Genesis (Gn 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14) and points back to the promise of Genesis 3:15 as well as forward to Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to David<\/h5>\n<p>In 2 Samuel 7, God gave a promise to King David that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Sm 7:16; Ps 89:34-37). It is with this Davidic covenant that the promised line, which had previously run from Adam through Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah, is now narrowed to the royal line of the house of David. David is to be the ancestor of the Messiah-King to come (Ps 89:3, 27-37). David thus became a central figure in the history of God’s plan to redeem the world. Jesus Christ is referred to as the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise of a New Covenant<\/h5>\n<p>In Jeremiah 31:31-37, it is promised that in future days the Lord would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The content of this new covenant reemphasizes and extends the basic promises of the former covenant: “I will be their God, and they will be my people. . . . I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins” (vv 33-34, <span>nlt<\/span>). It would appear that the “new covenant” of Jeremiah is to be viewed as a restatement of the same basic promises included in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant was inaugurated with the first advent of Christ, and believers in Christ are now recipients by the Holy Spirit of the blessings of that new covenant (Heb 8:6-13). The complete and final realization of these blessings in all their fullness awaits the return of Christ, the complete establishment of his kingdom in its outward and final form, and the blessedness of life in the new heavens and new earth. In the intervening time, God’s people live in a day in which some of the benefits of the age to come are a present reality but the fullness of the new age is yet future.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePromiseThemeintheNewTestament\">The Promise Theme in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament writers refer to the OT promises in a way that indicates that they did not view these promises as separate and isolated assertions but rather as portions of a unitary promise that is ultimately fulfilled in Christ (see Lk 1:54-55, 69-73; Acts 13:23, 32-33; 26:6-7; 2 Cor 1:20). Jesus is the fulfillment of the promises made to the patriarchs and David, and these promises are accordingly to be viewed as having a single focal point in him.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of Galatians and Ephesians, Paul develops this idea in more detail, saying to the Gentile Christians that they are made “heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:6, <span>niv<\/span>). In fact, Paul says that Gentiles who trust in Christ are incorporated into the seed of Abraham and are thus heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29), and he even goes so far as to equate the gospel with the promise given to Abraham when he states, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you’ ” (Gal 3:8, <span>niv<\/span>). These and other NT texts establish the close connection between the coming of Christ and the fulfillment of the promise. The promises of God find their point of convergence in Christ and all that he accomplished, and will yet accomplish, for his people.<\/p>\n<p>One further aspect of the promise particularly emphasized in the NT concerns the coming of the Holy Spirit. Paul refers to believers as sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13), and as receiving the promise of the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The gift of the Holy Spirit is not only the fulfillment of an OT promise (Is 32:15; Ez 36:27; Jl 2:28), and that of Christ himself (Lk 24:49; Jn 14:16, 20; Acts 1:4), but it is also itself a promise of something yet future. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the believer as a guarantee of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). The Holy Spirit is the “firstfruit” of future glory (Rom 8:23).<\/p>\n<p>One final aspect of the promise theme in the NT concerns the assurance of Christ’s second advent and the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth (cf. Jn 14:1-3; 2 Pt 3:4, 9, 13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; God, Being and Attributes of; Hope; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROMISE<\/h3>\n<p>Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofPromise\">Types of Promise<\/p>\n<p>In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who gives them is totally able to perform that which he has promised (Rom 4:21).<\/p>\n<p>Divine promises in Scripture assure their recipients of many spiritual and temporal benefits, including sonship (2 Cor 6:16–7:1), forgiveness of sin (1 Jn 1:9), answer to prayer (Lk 11:9), deliverance from temptations (1 Cor 10:13), sustaining grace for difficult times (2 Cor 12:9), provision for all needs (Phil 4:19), reward for obedience (Jas 1:12), and eternal life (Lk 18:29-30; Jn 3:16; Rom 6:22-23). God’s promises are certain and sure, but participation in their blessing often requires that certain conditions on which they are predicated be met. Divine promises also are not always guarantees of blessing. Indeed, there are promises announcing the certainty of judgment on those who refuse to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus (2 Thes 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the promises of God, which have subjective and individual application to many different people in widely different times and places, there are a great many promises that pertain to the programmatic unfolding of God’s plan of redemption in a grand procession of historical events. These promises have neither repeated applications nor conditional natures. In such cases, promise becomes nearly synonymous with prophecy, and promises of this type, along with their subsequent fulfillment, are intricately intertwined in the entire fabric of redemptive history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PromisesintheOldTestament\">Promises in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The highlights of the promise theme in the OT can be seen in the promise of what is often termed the protevangelium (i.e., the first announcement of the gospel) given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden immediately after the fall into sin (Gn 3:15). Subsequent promises are the covenants God made with Abraham (chs 12; 15; 17) and with David (2 Sm 7), followed by the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31).<\/p>\n<h5>The Protevangelium<\/h5>\n<p>Genesis 3:15b says: “Your [Satan’s] offspring and her [Eve’s] offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (<span>nlt<\/span>). This statement is a promise that at some future time the offspring of the woman will crush Satan. The offspring of the woman is individualized in the “he” of the last phrase. “He” shall strike you (i.e., Satan) on the head, although Satan will inflict a wound on the offspring of the woman. Here, then, is the promise that gives Adam and Eve, as well as their descendants, the basis to expect the eventual destruction of their adversary Satan through their offspring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>In Genesis 12:1-7 Abraham is told to leave his people and country and to go to a land that the Lord would show to him. God, in turn, promises him that (1) his offspring would become a great nation; (2) he would be blessed and his name made great; (3) through him other nations would be blessed; and (4) the land of Canaan would be given to his descendants. Of particular significance among these promises given to Abraham is that through his offspring he will bless many nations. This promise is repeated five times in the book of Genesis (Gn 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14) and points back to the promise of Genesis 3:15 as well as forward to Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to David<\/h5>\n<p>In 2 Samuel 7, God gave a promise to King David that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Sm 7:16; Ps 89:34-37). It is with this Davidic covenant that the promised line, which had previously run from Adam through Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah, is now narrowed to the royal line of the house of David. David is to be the ancestor of the Messiah-King to come (Ps 89:3, 27-37). David thus became a central figure in the history of God’s plan to redeem the world. Jesus Christ is referred to as the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise of a New Covenant<\/h5>\n<p>In Jeremiah 31:31-37, it is promised that in future days the Lord would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The content of this new covenant reemphasizes and extends the basic promises of the former covenant: “I will be their God, and they will be my people. . . . I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins” (vv 33-34, <span>nlt<\/span>). It would appear that the “new covenant” of Jeremiah is to be viewed as a restatement of the same basic promises included in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant was inaugurated with the first advent of Christ, and believers in Christ are now recipients by the Holy Spirit of the blessings of that new covenant (Heb 8:6-13). The complete and final realization of these blessings in all their fullness awaits the return of Christ, the complete establishment of his kingdom in its outward and final form, and the blessedness of life in the new heavens and new earth. In the intervening time, God’s people live in a day in which some of the benefits of the age to come are a present reality but the fullness of the new age is yet future.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePromiseThemeintheNewTestament\">The Promise Theme in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament writers refer to the OT promises in a way that indicates that they did not view these promises as separate and isolated assertions but rather as portions of a unitary promise that is ultimately fulfilled in Christ (see Lk 1:54-55, 69-73; Acts 13:23, 32-33; 26:6-7; 2 Cor 1:20). Jesus is the fulfillment of the promises made to the patriarchs and David, and these promises are accordingly to be viewed as having a single focal point in him.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of Galatians and Ephesians, Paul develops this idea in more detail, saying to the Gentile Christians that they are made “heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:6, <span>niv<\/span>). In fact, Paul says that Gentiles who trust in Christ are incorporated into the seed of Abraham and are thus heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29), and he even goes so far as to equate the gospel with the promise given to Abraham when he states, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you’ ” (Gal 3:8, <span>niv<\/span>). These and other NT texts establish the close connection between the coming of Christ and the fulfillment of the promise. The promises of God find their point of convergence in Christ and all that he accomplished, and will yet accomplish, for his people.<\/p>\n<p>One further aspect of the promise particularly emphasized in the NT concerns the coming of the Holy Spirit. Paul refers to believers as sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13), and as receiving the promise of the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The gift of the Holy Spirit is not only the fulfillment of an OT promise (Is 32:15; Ez 36:27; Jl 2:28), and that of Christ himself (Lk 24:49; Jn 14:16, 20; Acts 1:4), but it is also itself a promise of something yet future. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the believer as a guarantee of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). The Holy Spirit is the “firstfruit” of future glory (Rom 8:23).<\/p>\n<p>One final aspect of the promise theme in the NT concerns the assurance of Christ’s second advent and the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth (cf. Jn 14:1-3; 2 Pt 3:4, 9, 13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; God, Being and Attributes of; Hope; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROMISE Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified. Types of Promise In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who giv...","summary_en":"PROMISE Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified. Types of Promise In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who giv...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32526,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Reconciliation","title_en":"Reconciliation","content_ro":"<h3>RECONCILIATION<\/h3>\n<p>Restoration of friendly relationships and of peace where there had previously been hostility and alienation. Ordinarily, it also includes the removal of the offense that caused the disruption of peace and harmony. This was especially so in the relation of God with humanity, when Christ removed the enmity existing between God and mankind by his vicarious sacrifice. The Scripture speaks first of Christ’s substitutionary death in effecting reconciliation of God with sinners; of sinners appropriating this free gift by faith; the promised forgiveness and salvation that become the sinners’ possession by grace; and finally reconciliation with God (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:16).<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalassein<\/span> (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:19) signifies first of all the reconciliation of God with the world, expressing God’s initial change of heart toward sinners. The problem is not rightly addressed by questioning whether the unchanging God ever changes his mind; the situation rather is one where an altered relationship now exists between God and sinners by Christ’s interposing sacrifice on behalf of fallen humanity. The point of the reconciliation is that God, for Christ’s sake, now feels toward sinners as though they had never offended him. The reconciliation is complete and perfect, covering mankind both extensively and intensively—that is, all sinners and all sin. The cause of rupture between God and sinners has now been healed, a truth wholly independent of humanity’s mood or attitude. While sinners were still the objects of God’s just wrath, Christ, in full harmony with the gracious will of his heavenly Father, interposed himself for their sakes, for the restoration of harmony.<\/p>\n<p>So basic is this truth that without objective reconciliation there is no thought of salvation, of regeneration, of faith, of Christian life. The initiative in reconciliation, moreover, is all on God’s side; through his Word, the gospel, God reveals to sinners that he is fully reconciled with them because of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The vicarious atonement or redemption of Christ underlies God’s reconciling activity. Reconciliation took place not by God’s exercise of divine fiat or decree of power but through Christ interposing himself as the people’s substitute for the law’s condemnation. Thus the vicarious atonement is the key to understanding reconciliation as scripturally conceived and taught. Christ “became sin for us”; he assumed the full obligations of the law, perfectly fulfilling it and fully bearing the guilt and punishment. Sins and guilt were laid on him; his righteousness attained under the law was imputed to mankind.<\/p>\n<p>The human predicament, simply and precisely, was the human inability to change or rectify in any way the broken, hostile relationship existing between humanity and God. Christ was the bridge. To carry out his substitutionary mission was the purpose of his incarnation. His sacrificial suffering and death, sealed by his triumphant resurrection, achieved mankind’s redemption (Rom 4:25). Christ suffered death not as the common lot of all people but as the wages of sin.<\/p>\n<p>His vicarious satisfaction for all sins is the central teaching of the Scripture. Everything literally depends upon the fact that the turning point for humanity came from God, who was working out reconciliation with the world through Christ. This is not simply an imagined or piously conceived idea, something presented as true by deeply concerned and thoughtful people, but a reality that happened (Is 53:6; 2 Cor 5:21; Heb 9:12-14; 1 Pt 1:19). It was God’s solution for the grievous, hostile state that existed between a righteous, angry God and sinful, offending people.<\/p>\n<p>The Scripture never loses sight of the sweeping extent of Christ’s work, the atonement for the sins of all people (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 2:2). Christ is the sinners’ shield from and before the just wrath of God. Nor was it merely by God’s accepting it as sufficient that Christ’s atonement availed; it was in fact and in truth the adequate and full payment (Mt 20:28; Rom 3:25; Heb 7:26-28; 1 Tm 2:6; 1 Jn 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>The gospel, therefore, is the message that informs the sinner of God’s reconciliation with sinners through Christ and powerfully persuades the sinner to accept this truth in faith, or as the apostle Paul puts it: “For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people’s sins against them. This is the wonderful message he has given us to tell others. We are Christ’s ambassadors, and God is using us to speak to you. We urge you, as though Christ himself were here pleading with you, ‘Be reconciled to God!’ ” (2 Cor 5:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RECONCILIATION<\/h3>\n<p>Restoration of friendly relationships and of peace where there had previously been hostility and alienation. Ordinarily, it also includes the removal of the offense that caused the disruption of peace and harmony. This was especially so in the relation of God with humanity, when Christ removed the enmity existing between God and mankind by his vicarious sacrifice. The Scripture speaks first of Christ’s substitutionary death in effecting reconciliation of God with sinners; of sinners appropriating this free gift by faith; the promised forgiveness and salvation that become the sinners’ possession by grace; and finally reconciliation with God (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:16).<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalassein<\/span> (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:19) signifies first of all the reconciliation of God with the world, expressing God’s initial change of heart toward sinners. The problem is not rightly addressed by questioning whether the unchanging God ever changes his mind; the situation rather is one where an altered relationship now exists between God and sinners by Christ’s interposing sacrifice on behalf of fallen humanity. The point of the reconciliation is that God, for Christ’s sake, now feels toward sinners as though they had never offended him. The reconciliation is complete and perfect, covering mankind both extensively and intensively—that is, all sinners and all sin. The cause of rupture between God and sinners has now been healed, a truth wholly independent of humanity’s mood or attitude. While sinners were still the objects of God’s just wrath, Christ, in full harmony with the gracious will of his heavenly Father, interposed himself for their sakes, for the restoration of harmony.<\/p>\n<p>So basic is this truth that without objective reconciliation there is no thought of salvation, of regeneration, of faith, of Christian life. The initiative in reconciliation, moreover, is all on God’s side; through his Word, the gospel, God reveals to sinners that he is fully reconciled with them because of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The vicarious atonement or redemption of Christ underlies God’s reconciling activity. Reconciliation took place not by God’s exercise of divine fiat or decree of power but through Christ interposing himself as the people’s substitute for the law’s condemnation. Thus the vicarious atonement is the key to understanding reconciliation as scripturally conceived and taught. Christ “became sin for us”; he assumed the full obligations of the law, perfectly fulfilling it and fully bearing the guilt and punishment. Sins and guilt were laid on him; his righteousness attained under the law was imputed to mankind.<\/p>\n<p>The human predicament, simply and precisely, was the human inability to change or rectify in any way the broken, hostile relationship existing between humanity and God. Christ was the bridge. To carry out his substitutionary mission was the purpose of his incarnation. His sacrificial suffering and death, sealed by his triumphant resurrection, achieved mankind’s redemption (Rom 4:25). Christ suffered death not as the common lot of all people but as the wages of sin.<\/p>\n<p>His vicarious satisfaction for all sins is the central teaching of the Scripture. Everything literally depends upon the fact that the turning point for humanity came from God, who was working out reconciliation with the world through Christ. This is not simply an imagined or piously conceived idea, something presented as true by deeply concerned and thoughtful people, but a reality that happened (Is 53:6; 2 Cor 5:21; Heb 9:12-14; 1 Pt 1:19). It was God’s solution for the grievous, hostile state that existed between a righteous, angry God and sinful, offending people.<\/p>\n<p>The Scripture never loses sight of the sweeping extent of Christ’s work, the atonement for the sins of all people (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 2:2). Christ is the sinners’ shield from and before the just wrath of God. Nor was it merely by God’s accepting it as sufficient that Christ’s atonement availed; it was in fact and in truth the adequate and full payment (Mt 20:28; Rom 3:25; Heb 7:26-28; 1 Tm 2:6; 1 Jn 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>The gospel, therefore, is the message that informs the sinner of God’s reconciliation with sinners through Christ and powerfully persuades the sinner to accept this truth in faith, or as the apostle Paul puts it: “For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people’s sins against them. This is the wonderful message he has given us to tell others. We are Christ’s ambassadors, and God is using us to speak to you. We urge you, as though Christ himself were here pleading with you, ‘Be reconciled to God!’ ” (2 Cor 5:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"RECONCILIATION Restoration of friendly relationships and of peace where there had previously been hostility and alienation. Ordinarily, it also includes the removal of the offense that caused the disruption of peace and harmony. This was especially so in the relation of God with humanity, when Christ removed the enmity existing between God and mankind by his vicarious sacrifice. The Scripture speaks first of Christ’s substitutionary death in effecting reconciliation of God with sinners; of si...","summary_en":"RECONCILIATION Restoration of friendly relationships and of peace where there had previously been hostility and alienation. Ordinarily, it also includes the removal of the offense that caused the disruption of peace and harmony. This was especially so in the relation of God with humanity, when Christ removed the enmity existing between God and mankind by his vicarious sacrifice. The Scripture speaks first of Christ’s substitutionary death in effecting reconciliation of God with sinners; of si...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32569,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Redemption Redeemer","title_en":"Redemption Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>REDEEMER, REDEMPTION<\/h3>\n<p>English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentandNewTestamentWords\">Old Testament and New Testament Words<\/p>\n<p>For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the particular situation, that convey the idea of redemption. The meaning of these redemptive terms rests on legal, social, and religious customs that are foreign to modern culture. An understanding of the culture is needed for an understanding of the terminology and its use.<\/p>\n<p>The first term used for redemption has a legal context. The verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">padah<\/span> is used when an animal substitutes for (or redeems) a person or another animal. The noun derived from the root means the ransom or the the price paid. When a living being, person or animal, requires redemption, the substitution must be made, or price paid; otherwise, the creature involved is killed (Ex 13:13; 34:20). However, there is evidence that this rule was not always strictly followed (Ex 21:8; Jb 6:23).<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption had special significance for the firstborn. The firstborn male, both man and beast, belonged to God. In theory the firstborn was sacrificed to him. This was done in the case of many animals, but the human firstborn and some animals were redeemed (Ex 13:13; 34:20; Nm 18:15-16). In the redemption of the firstborn son, an animal was substituted, although later a sum of money was paid (Nm 18:16).<\/p>\n<p>The second term involved is the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ga’al<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is used primarily in relation to family rules and obligations, the laws governing family property rights and duties. For example, should a piece of property be lost by a family member, the next of kin had both the right and the obligation to redeem this property. This right of redemption protected the family inheritance. The noun derived from this root is equivalent to the English root “redemption,” and the person who buys back the property is the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> or redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>An Israelite who was forced to sell himself into slavery to pay his debts could be redeemed by a near relative or even by himself (Lv 25:47-49). Land might also be redeemed in the same fashion (25:25-28; Jer 32:6-9).<\/p>\n<p>The right of redemption extended also to persons in special circumstances. The obligation of a man to marry his brother’s widow is well known. In the book of Ruth, the right of redemption is extended to a distant relative. In this story, Boaz redeemed not only the property but Ruth as well, and she became his wife (Ru 3:13; 4:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The third term used in Hebrew is the root verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kaphar<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to cover.” From this root come the terms meaning to cover sin, atone, or expiate. The noun derived, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span><em>,<\/em> means the price paid to cover sin, when the term is used in the religious sense.<\/p>\n<p>The term is used to mean the payment made for any life that should be forfeited. A good illustration is the price paid by the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death. Under the law, the owner’s life was forfeited, but he could redeem himself by paying the required ransom (Ex 21:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>All three terms are translated by the same Greek verb, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">luo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to loose.” The noun <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">lutron<\/span> (ransom), is used for all three terms on occasion. This indicates that while the Hebrew used different words for different situations, the same essential meaning of redemption was involved in all situations. The concept of redeeming or freeing was of primary concern.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodasRedeemer\">God as Redeemer<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the object of God’s redemption is generally the people as a whole, or the nation, rather than individuals. The beginning of this concept of national redemption is seen in God’s freeing the people from slavery in Egypt. Though they were in bondage, their God ransomed them (Ex 6:6; Dt 15:15).<\/p>\n<p>As indicated by the terms used for redeeming or ransoming, the payment of a set price or the substitution of another life was involved. When the redemptive concept is applied to God as the subject, he delivers—without the payment of a price—by his might or power: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, and I will free you from your slavery in Egypt. I will redeem you with mighty power and great acts of judgment” (Ex 6:6, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Dt 15:15). The same thought is carried forward in other times of need and deliverance, such as the time of exile. God is the national deliverer (e.g., Is 29:22; 35:10; 43:1; 44:22; Jer 31:11).<\/p>\n<p>Again there is no suggestion that God paid a price to free his people. God redeems by his own power. “For this is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says: ‘When I sold you into exile, I received no payment. Now I can redeem you without paying for you’ ” (Is 52:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). When Cyrus let the people free, it was again without payment of a price (45:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Christian community, especially in the early centuries of the church, there arose the idea that a ransom price was needed to pay for sins. In fact, it was often taught that the sinner was, in effect, held captive by Satan. Christ’s death was the ransom price paid by God to Satan to free sinful people. This teaching is not supported by Scripture. The death of Christ is an atonement or expiation made for sin, but this does not mean that his death was a price paid to Satan. God is not pictured anywhere in Scripture as getting into such a commercial transaction with Satan. The redeeming work of the cross must always lie within the realm of divine mystery.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RedemptionandtheMessiah\">Redemption and the Messiah<\/p>\n<p>In the OT redemption is closely linked with the messianic hope. From the time of the exodus on, God is revealed as deliverer. The hope of redemption is very strong during the Captivity. The prophets constantly speak of God as redeemer or deliverer. This hope was to be fulfilled ultimately through God’s anointed one, or Messiah, who would be of the line of David (Is 9:1-6; 11:1-9; Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>The messianic hope grew stronger during the periods of exile and persecution. In fact, during the long centuries of persecution, this hope of a messianic deliverer was stronger than ever. This period, generally called the intertestamental period, lasted about four centuries and extended from the last of the prophets until the time of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Christians believe that in Jesus the Christ (or Jesus the Messiah) we see the fulfillment of the OT redemptive concept. The redemptive image is very evident in the Gospels. John the Baptist depicted Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of God’s redemptive kingdom (Mt 3:12) and hence, the Messiah of Israel. Jesus, the Son of Man, came to give himself as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). The work of the Messiah was vicarious and substitutionary.<\/p>\n<p>The same thought occurs especially in the writings of Paul. Christ is the sin offering to the Father (Rom 3:25). Redemption is by the giving of his life (Acts 20:28) for a purchased people (1 Pt 2:9; see also 1 Cor 7:22-24; 2 Cor 5:14-17). These are all words or expressions used to present the central idea of redemption or atonement. Jesus Christ is the one who in himself fulfilled the redemption concept of Scripture and by his sacrifice provided for the redemption of sinners.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption has deep meaning for God’s people. In the OT it illustrates the truth that God is the Savior of his covenant people. Although Israel fell into sin by denying God’s law, God did not destroy them but restored them to favor upon repentance.<\/p>\n<p>In the prophets, especially, God’s redemptive work was to be completed through the Messiah and his redemptive sacrifice. The followers of Jesus believed that he was the Messiah who would provide redemption for the whole world. Coupled with the idea of redemption is the motivating force of divine love as the basis for restoration (Jn 3:16). The one who believes will be freed from the bondage of sin and find favor again with his redeeming God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Ransom; Salvation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REDEEMER, REDEMPTION<\/h3>\n<p>English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentandNewTestamentWords\">Old Testament and New Testament Words<\/p>\n<p>For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the particular situation, that convey the idea of redemption. The meaning of these redemptive terms rests on legal, social, and religious customs that are foreign to modern culture. An understanding of the culture is needed for an understanding of the terminology and its use.<\/p>\n<p>The first term used for redemption has a legal context. The verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">padah<\/span> is used when an animal substitutes for (or redeems) a person or another animal. The noun derived from the root means the ransom or the the price paid. When a living being, person or animal, requires redemption, the substitution must be made, or price paid; otherwise, the creature involved is killed (Ex 13:13; 34:20). However, there is evidence that this rule was not always strictly followed (Ex 21:8; Jb 6:23).<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption had special significance for the firstborn. The firstborn male, both man and beast, belonged to God. In theory the firstborn was sacrificed to him. This was done in the case of many animals, but the human firstborn and some animals were redeemed (Ex 13:13; 34:20; Nm 18:15-16). In the redemption of the firstborn son, an animal was substituted, although later a sum of money was paid (Nm 18:16).<\/p>\n<p>The second term involved is the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ga’al<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is used primarily in relation to family rules and obligations, the laws governing family property rights and duties. For example, should a piece of property be lost by a family member, the next of kin had both the right and the obligation to redeem this property. This right of redemption protected the family inheritance. The noun derived from this root is equivalent to the English root “redemption,” and the person who buys back the property is the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> or redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>An Israelite who was forced to sell himself into slavery to pay his debts could be redeemed by a near relative or even by himself (Lv 25:47-49). Land might also be redeemed in the same fashion (25:25-28; Jer 32:6-9).<\/p>\n<p>The right of redemption extended also to persons in special circumstances. The obligation of a man to marry his brother’s widow is well known. In the book of Ruth, the right of redemption is extended to a distant relative. In this story, Boaz redeemed not only the property but Ruth as well, and she became his wife (Ru 3:13; 4:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The third term used in Hebrew is the root verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kaphar<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to cover.” From this root come the terms meaning to cover sin, atone, or expiate. The noun derived, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span><em>,<\/em> means the price paid to cover sin, when the term is used in the religious sense.<\/p>\n<p>The term is used to mean the payment made for any life that should be forfeited. A good illustration is the price paid by the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death. Under the law, the owner’s life was forfeited, but he could redeem himself by paying the required ransom (Ex 21:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>All three terms are translated by the same Greek verb, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">luo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to loose.” The noun <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">lutron<\/span> (ransom), is used for all three terms on occasion. This indicates that while the Hebrew used different words for different situations, the same essential meaning of redemption was involved in all situations. The concept of redeeming or freeing was of primary concern.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodasRedeemer\">God as Redeemer<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the object of God’s redemption is generally the people as a whole, or the nation, rather than individuals. The beginning of this concept of national redemption is seen in God’s freeing the people from slavery in Egypt. Though they were in bondage, their God ransomed them (Ex 6:6; Dt 15:15).<\/p>\n<p>As indicated by the terms used for redeeming or ransoming, the payment of a set price or the substitution of another life was involved. When the redemptive concept is applied to God as the subject, he delivers—without the payment of a price—by his might or power: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, and I will free you from your slavery in Egypt. I will redeem you with mighty power and great acts of judgment” (Ex 6:6, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Dt 15:15). The same thought is carried forward in other times of need and deliverance, such as the time of exile. God is the national deliverer (e.g., Is 29:22; 35:10; 43:1; 44:22; Jer 31:11).<\/p>\n<p>Again there is no suggestion that God paid a price to free his people. God redeems by his own power. “For this is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says: ‘When I sold you into exile, I received no payment. Now I can redeem you without paying for you’ ” (Is 52:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). When Cyrus let the people free, it was again without payment of a price (45:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Christian community, especially in the early centuries of the church, there arose the idea that a ransom price was needed to pay for sins. In fact, it was often taught that the sinner was, in effect, held captive by Satan. Christ’s death was the ransom price paid by God to Satan to free sinful people. This teaching is not supported by Scripture. The death of Christ is an atonement or expiation made for sin, but this does not mean that his death was a price paid to Satan. God is not pictured anywhere in Scripture as getting into such a commercial transaction with Satan. The redeeming work of the cross must always lie within the realm of divine mystery.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RedemptionandtheMessiah\">Redemption and the Messiah<\/p>\n<p>In the OT redemption is closely linked with the messianic hope. From the time of the exodus on, God is revealed as deliverer. The hope of redemption is very strong during the Captivity. The prophets constantly speak of God as redeemer or deliverer. This hope was to be fulfilled ultimately through God’s anointed one, or Messiah, who would be of the line of David (Is 9:1-6; 11:1-9; Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>The messianic hope grew stronger during the periods of exile and persecution. In fact, during the long centuries of persecution, this hope of a messianic deliverer was stronger than ever. This period, generally called the intertestamental period, lasted about four centuries and extended from the last of the prophets until the time of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Christians believe that in Jesus the Christ (or Jesus the Messiah) we see the fulfillment of the OT redemptive concept. The redemptive image is very evident in the Gospels. John the Baptist depicted Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of God’s redemptive kingdom (Mt 3:12) and hence, the Messiah of Israel. Jesus, the Son of Man, came to give himself as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). The work of the Messiah was vicarious and substitutionary.<\/p>\n<p>The same thought occurs especially in the writings of Paul. Christ is the sin offering to the Father (Rom 3:25). Redemption is by the giving of his life (Acts 20:28) for a purchased people (1 Pt 2:9; see also 1 Cor 7:22-24; 2 Cor 5:14-17). These are all words or expressions used to present the central idea of redemption or atonement. Jesus Christ is the one who in himself fulfilled the redemption concept of Scripture and by his sacrifice provided for the redemption of sinners.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption has deep meaning for God’s people. In the OT it illustrates the truth that God is the Savior of his covenant people. Although Israel fell into sin by denying God’s law, God did not destroy them but restored them to favor upon repentance.<\/p>\n<p>In the prophets, especially, God’s redemptive work was to be completed through the Messiah and his redemptive sacrifice. The followers of Jesus believed that he was the Messiah who would provide redemption for the whole world. Coupled with the idea of redemption is the motivating force of divine love as the basis for restoration (Jn 3:16). The one who believes will be freed from the bondage of sin and find favor again with his redeeming God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Ransom; Salvation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REDEEMER, REDEMPTION English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison. Old Testament and New Testament Words For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the parti...","summary_en":"REDEEMER, REDEMPTION English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison. Old Testament and New Testament Words For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the parti...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35499,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sin","title_en":"Sin","content_ro":"<h3>SIN<\/h3>\n<p>Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Terminology\">Terminology<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s God sets the ideal, the standard for human behavior. The most frequent biblical words for sin speak of violating that standard in some fashion. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hata’<\/span> and Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hamartia<\/span> meant originally “to miss the mark, fail in duty” (Rom 3:23). As Lawgiver, God sets limits to man’s freedom; another frequent term (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘abar<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">parabasis<\/span>) describes sin as “transgression,” “overstepping set limits.” Similar terms are <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pesha‘<\/span> (Hebrew), meaning “rebellion,” “transgression”; <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’asham<\/span> (Hebrew) denotes “trespassing God’s kingly prerogative,” “incurring guilt”; <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paraptoma<\/span> (Greek) denotes “a false step out of the appointed way,” “trespass on forbidden ground.” “Iniquity” often translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘aon<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning “perverseness,” “wrongness”), for which the nearest NT equivalent is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawlessness”) or <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paranomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawbreaking”).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Genesis traces sin to deliberate misuse of God-given freedom in disobedience of a single limiting prohibition. Ezekiel insists eloquently upon individual responsibility against traditional theories of corporate guilt (Ez 18). Following Jeremiah, he urges the need for a cleansed, renewed inner life if outward behavior is to be reformed; the divine law must become a motivating force within a person if sin is to be overcome (Jer 31:29-34; Ez 36:24-29).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 51 offers a keen analysis of the inner meaning of sin. By affirming “in sin did my mother conceive me,” the psalmist confessed that his life had been sinful from the first. His whole personality needed “purging”; he was defiled. Ritual sacrifices offer no solution. Only a broken, contrite heart can prepare a sinner for God’s cleansing. The only hope, the sole ground of appeal, lies in God’s steadfast love and abundant mercy. In spite of its rigorous view of sin, the OT also contains gracious assurance of forgiveness (Ps 103:8-14 Is 1:18; 55:6-7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJesusTeachings\">In Jesus’ Teachings<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings on the subject of sin took up the gracious offer of divine forgiveness and renewal, not only proclaiming with authority, “Your sins are forgiven,” but showing many acts of compassion and social recognition that he came to be the friend of sinners, calling them to repentance, restoring their hope and dignity (Mt 9:1-13; 11:19; Lk 15; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said little about the origin of sin, except to trace it to the human heart and will (Mt 6:22-23; 7:17-19; 18:7; Mk 7:20-23), but he significantly redefined sin’s scope. Where the law could assess only people’s actions, Jesus showed that anger, contempt, lust, hardness of heart, and deceitfulness are also sinful. He also spoke of sins of neglect, good left undone, the barren tree, the unused talent, the priest ignoring the injured, and the love never shown (Mt 25:41-46). He especially condemns sins against love—unbrotherliness, implacable hostility, selfishness, insensitivity (Lk 12:16-21; 16:19-31). And he condemned self-righteousness and spiritual blindness (Mt 23:16-26; Mk 3:22-30). Jesus spoke of sin as sickness (Mk 2:17) and sometimes as folly (Lk 12:20). Nevertheless, Jesus declared that fallen humans can be cured with God’s help (7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJohnsWritings\">In John’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel assumes sinful humanity’s need, the sacrifice of Christ the Lamb to bear away the sin of the world, and the offer of light and life in Christ. The new note is an emphasis on sin that refuses to accept the salvation provided in Christ, by the love of God for the world—the refusal to believe. It is for loving darkness, rejecting light, and refusing to accept Christ the Savior that humans are judged already (Jn 3:16-21).<\/p>\n<p>Against Gnosticism’s claim that for advanced Christians sin does not matter, 1 John affirms 15 reasons why sin cannot be tolerated in the Christian life and emphasizes again that sin is both ignorance of the truth and lack of love (1 Jn 3:3-10). Yet God forgives those who confess their sins, while Christ atones for their sins and intercedes for them (1:7–2:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InPaulsWritings\">In Paul’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>Paul argued strongly, from observation and from Scripture, that all have sinned (Rom 1–3). To him, sin is a force, a power, a “law” ruling within people (Rom 5:21; 7:23; 8:2; 1 Cor 15:56), producing all kinds of evil behavior—the hardening of the conscience (Rom 7:21-24), alienation from God, and subjection to death (Rom 5:10; 6:23; Eph 2:1-5, 12; Col 1:21). Humans are helpless to reform themselves (Rom 7:24). Paul’s explanation of this desperate, universal condition is variously interpreted. Some readers think that Romans 5:12-21 says that Adam’s sin is the source of all sin; others, that it is the “similitude” (<span>kjv<\/span>) of all sin. In any event, Paul essentially said that “every man is his own Adam,” which means that each person is fully responsible for his or her sinful condition, even if the sinful nature was inherited from Adam.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to sin, for Paul, lies in the believer’s death with Christ—death to sin, self, the world. Concurrently, the new life of the invasive, effusive Spirit transforms one’s life from within, making each person a new creation by sanctifying the personality into the likeness of Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-9; 6; 8:1-4, 28-29; 2 Cor 5:14-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flesh; Justification, Justified; Sanctification; Sin unto Death; Unpardonable Sin, The.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SIN<\/h3>\n<p>Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Terminology\">Terminology<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s God sets the ideal, the standard for human behavior. The most frequent biblical words for sin speak of violating that standard in some fashion. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hata’<\/span> and Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hamartia<\/span> meant originally “to miss the mark, fail in duty” (Rom 3:23). As Lawgiver, God sets limits to man’s freedom; another frequent term (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘abar<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">parabasis<\/span>) describes sin as “transgression,” “overstepping set limits.” Similar terms are <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pesha‘<\/span> (Hebrew), meaning “rebellion,” “transgression”; <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’asham<\/span> (Hebrew) denotes “trespassing God’s kingly prerogative,” “incurring guilt”; <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paraptoma<\/span> (Greek) denotes “a false step out of the appointed way,” “trespass on forbidden ground.” “Iniquity” often translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘aon<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning “perverseness,” “wrongness”), for which the nearest NT equivalent is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawlessness”) or <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paranomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawbreaking”).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Genesis traces sin to deliberate misuse of God-given freedom in disobedience of a single limiting prohibition. Ezekiel insists eloquently upon individual responsibility against traditional theories of corporate guilt (Ez 18). Following Jeremiah, he urges the need for a cleansed, renewed inner life if outward behavior is to be reformed; the divine law must become a motivating force within a person if sin is to be overcome (Jer 31:29-34; Ez 36:24-29).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 51 offers a keen analysis of the inner meaning of sin. By affirming “in sin did my mother conceive me,” the psalmist confessed that his life had been sinful from the first. His whole personality needed “purging”; he was defiled. Ritual sacrifices offer no solution. Only a broken, contrite heart can prepare a sinner for God’s cleansing. The only hope, the sole ground of appeal, lies in God’s steadfast love and abundant mercy. In spite of its rigorous view of sin, the OT also contains gracious assurance of forgiveness (Ps 103:8-14 Is 1:18; 55:6-7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJesusTeachings\">In Jesus’ Teachings<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings on the subject of sin took up the gracious offer of divine forgiveness and renewal, not only proclaiming with authority, “Your sins are forgiven,” but showing many acts of compassion and social recognition that he came to be the friend of sinners, calling them to repentance, restoring their hope and dignity (Mt 9:1-13; 11:19; Lk 15; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said little about the origin of sin, except to trace it to the human heart and will (Mt 6:22-23; 7:17-19; 18:7; Mk 7:20-23), but he significantly redefined sin’s scope. Where the law could assess only people’s actions, Jesus showed that anger, contempt, lust, hardness of heart, and deceitfulness are also sinful. He also spoke of sins of neglect, good left undone, the barren tree, the unused talent, the priest ignoring the injured, and the love never shown (Mt 25:41-46). He especially condemns sins against love—unbrotherliness, implacable hostility, selfishness, insensitivity (Lk 12:16-21; 16:19-31). And he condemned self-righteousness and spiritual blindness (Mt 23:16-26; Mk 3:22-30). Jesus spoke of sin as sickness (Mk 2:17) and sometimes as folly (Lk 12:20). Nevertheless, Jesus declared that fallen humans can be cured with God’s help (7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJohnsWritings\">In John’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel assumes sinful humanity’s need, the sacrifice of Christ the Lamb to bear away the sin of the world, and the offer of light and life in Christ. The new note is an emphasis on sin that refuses to accept the salvation provided in Christ, by the love of God for the world—the refusal to believe. It is for loving darkness, rejecting light, and refusing to accept Christ the Savior that humans are judged already (Jn 3:16-21).<\/p>\n<p>Against Gnosticism’s claim that for advanced Christians sin does not matter, 1 John affirms 15 reasons why sin cannot be tolerated in the Christian life and emphasizes again that sin is both ignorance of the truth and lack of love (1 Jn 3:3-10). Yet God forgives those who confess their sins, while Christ atones for their sins and intercedes for them (1:7–2:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InPaulsWritings\">In Paul’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>Paul argued strongly, from observation and from Scripture, that all have sinned (Rom 1–3). To him, sin is a force, a power, a “law” ruling within people (Rom 5:21; 7:23; 8:2; 1 Cor 15:56), producing all kinds of evil behavior—the hardening of the conscience (Rom 7:21-24), alienation from God, and subjection to death (Rom 5:10; 6:23; Eph 2:1-5, 12; Col 1:21). Humans are helpless to reform themselves (Rom 7:24). Paul’s explanation of this desperate, universal condition is variously interpreted. Some readers think that Romans 5:12-21 says that Adam’s sin is the source of all sin; others, that it is the “similitude” (<span>kjv<\/span>) of all sin. In any event, Paul essentially said that “every man is his own Adam,” which means that each person is fully responsible for his or her sinful condition, even if the sinful nature was inherited from Adam.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to sin, for Paul, lies in the believer’s death with Christ—death to sin, self, the world. Concurrently, the new life of the invasive, effusive Spirit transforms one’s life from within, making each person a new creation by sanctifying the personality into the likeness of Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-9; 6; 8:1-4, 28-29; 2 Cor 5:14-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flesh; Justification, Justified; Sanctification; Sin unto Death; Unpardonable Sin, The.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SIN Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT. Terminology Israel’s God...","summary_en":"SIN Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT. Terminology Israel’s God...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35891,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37856,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Unpardonable Sin*","title_en":"the Unpardonable Sin*","content_ro":"<h3>UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The<\/h3>\n<p>Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of God’s power to Beelzebul, the devil (Mt 12:24). Several Scriptures reveal that many Jews had expressed the same kind of fallacious opinion, namely, that Jesus was performing miracles by the power of the devil (Mt 9:34; 11:18; Lk 7:33; 11:14-20; Jn 7:20; 8:48, 52; 10:20). A group of Jews, mostly Pharisees, were guilty of attributing to the devil what was the work of the Spirit demonstrated through the Lord Jesus. They committed <em>the<\/em> unpardonable sin when they said that Jesus’ actions, performed by the power of the Holy Spirit, originated from Beelzebul, the devil. Put simply, they sinned grievously by boldly characterizing Jesus’ work as coming from the devil. Interestingly, many Jews perpetuated this false characterization about Jesus long after his death. They did not deny that he did miracles; they said he did miracles by the power of the devil.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatIsnttheUnpardonableSin\">What Isn’t the Unpardonable Sin<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not Israel’s rebellion against God, even though this rebellion resulted in the eternal judgment of thousands and a temporary elimination of God’s blessing. The “sin unto death” mentioned by John (1 Jn 5:16-17) is not the unpardonable sin. It would be impossible for a person who has redemption and the forgiveness of sin (Eph 1:7), cleansing for present and future sin (1 Jn 1:7), and eternal life (Jn 3:16) to commit an unpardonable sin. But those who commit the “sin unto death” are all Christians. First John 5:16 says the person who commits the “sin unto death” is a “brother” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not rejection of the Lord Jesus, until the rejecter dies in his unbelief. Such a sin will not be forgiven throughout eternity, but it is not the same sin as that which Jesus condemned with these words: “Anyone who blasphemes against me, the Son of Man, can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, either in this world or in the world to come” (Mt 12:32, <span>nlt<\/span>). Numerous passages repeat the warning that unbelief in the Savior results in eternal death (Jn 3:18, 36; 1 Jn 5:12; Rv 20:15; 21:8), but these Scriptures do not directly speak of the unpardonable sin. Jesus asserted that a person could be an unbeliever in him, even to the degree of speaking against him, yet not be guilty of the unpardonable sin.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Justification, Justified; Sin unto Death.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The<\/h3>\n<p>Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of God’s power to Beelzebul, the devil (Mt 12:24). Several Scriptures reveal that many Jews had expressed the same kind of fallacious opinion, namely, that Jesus was performing miracles by the power of the devil (Mt 9:34; 11:18; Lk 7:33; 11:14-20; Jn 7:20; 8:48, 52; 10:20). A group of Jews, mostly Pharisees, were guilty of attributing to the devil what was the work of the Spirit demonstrated through the Lord Jesus. They committed <em>the<\/em> unpardonable sin when they said that Jesus’ actions, performed by the power of the Holy Spirit, originated from Beelzebul, the devil. Put simply, they sinned grievously by boldly characterizing Jesus’ work as coming from the devil. Interestingly, many Jews perpetuated this false characterization about Jesus long after his death. They did not deny that he did miracles; they said he did miracles by the power of the devil.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatIsnttheUnpardonableSin\">What Isn’t the Unpardonable Sin<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not Israel’s rebellion against God, even though this rebellion resulted in the eternal judgment of thousands and a temporary elimination of God’s blessing. The “sin unto death” mentioned by John (1 Jn 5:16-17) is not the unpardonable sin. It would be impossible for a person who has redemption and the forgiveness of sin (Eph 1:7), cleansing for present and future sin (1 Jn 1:7), and eternal life (Jn 3:16) to commit an unpardonable sin. But those who commit the “sin unto death” are all Christians. First John 5:16 says the person who commits the “sin unto death” is a “brother” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not rejection of the Lord Jesus, until the rejecter dies in his unbelief. Such a sin will not be forgiven throughout eternity, but it is not the same sin as that which Jesus condemned with these words: “Anyone who blasphemes against me, the Son of Man, can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, either in this world or in the world to come” (Mt 12:32, <span>nlt<\/span>). Numerous passages repeat the warning that unbelief in the Savior results in eternal death (Jn 3:18, 36; 1 Jn 5:12; Rv 20:15; 21:8), but these Scriptures do not directly speak of the unpardonable sin. Jesus asserted that a person could be an unbeliever in him, even to the degree of speaking against him, yet not be guilty of the unpardonable sin.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Justification, Justified; Sin unto Death.<\/p>","summary_ro":"UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of Go...","summary_en":"UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of Go...","source":"Articles\/U.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38674,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"World","title_en":"World","content_ro":"<h3>WORLD<\/h3>\n<p>An important NT term from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings:<\/p>\n<p>1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24).<\/p>\n<li>2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46).<\/li>\n<li>3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13).<\/li>\n<li>4. The total of human existence in this present life, with all of its experience and possessions (Mt 16:26; 1 Cor 7:33).<\/li>\n<li>5. The world order as alienated from God, in rebellion against him, and condemned for its godlessness. It is “this world” (Jn 8:23; 12:25; 1 Cor 3:19), as opposed to “that which is to come.” The ruler of this world is the devil (Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 1 Cor 5:10)—as John said it, “The whole world is under the control of the evil one” (1 Jn 5:19, <span>niv<\/span>). Christians are not of this world (Jn 15:19; 17:16), even though they live in the world and participate in its activities (17:11). The believer is regarded as dead to the world (Gal 6:14; cf. Col 3:2-3). The Christian is to be separated from the world (Jas 1:27).<\/li>\n<p>One’s relationship with the world is an indicator of one’s relationship with God. Those who love the world are void of love for God the Father (1 Jn 2:15). The Scripture points out that “all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). The world and its desires or lusts are transient, passing away, but the doer of God’s word abides forever (1 Jn 2:17; cf. 2 Cor 4:18). Friendship with the world is enmity toward God (Jas 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>The discourse of Jesus on the night before his crucifixion contains much teaching about the world. The world cannot receive the Spirit of truth (Jn 14:17). Christ gives a peace that the world cannot give (v 27). Jesus offers love, while the world gives hatred and persecution (15:19-20). The world’s hatred of God is also directed against the followers of Christ (vv 18-21). Although the disciples of Jesus have tribulation “in this world,” they are to be of good cheer, for Jesus has overcome the world (16:33).<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word sometimes translated “world” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aion<\/span><em>,<\/em> which emphasizes the temporal aspect of the world. It is used of time without end, eternity (e.g., Rom 1:25; 2 Cor 11:31; Phil 4:20). <em>See<\/em> Age.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORLD<\/h3>\n<p>An important NT term from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings:<\/p>\n<p>1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24).<\/p>\n<li>2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46).<\/li>\n<li>3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13).<\/li>\n<li>4. The total of human existence in this present life, with all of its experience and possessions (Mt 16:26; 1 Cor 7:33).<\/li>\n<li>5. The world order as alienated from God, in rebellion against him, and condemned for its godlessness. It is “this world” (Jn 8:23; 12:25; 1 Cor 3:19), as opposed to “that which is to come.” The ruler of this world is the devil (Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 1 Cor 5:10)—as John said it, “The whole world is under the control of the evil one” (1 Jn 5:19, <span>niv<\/span>). Christians are not of this world (Jn 15:19; 17:16), even though they live in the world and participate in its activities (17:11). The believer is regarded as dead to the world (Gal 6:14; cf. Col 3:2-3). The Christian is to be separated from the world (Jas 1:27).<\/li>\n<p>One’s relationship with the world is an indicator of one’s relationship with God. Those who love the world are void of love for God the Father (1 Jn 2:15). The Scripture points out that “all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). The world and its desires or lusts are transient, passing away, but the doer of God’s word abides forever (1 Jn 2:17; cf. 2 Cor 4:18). Friendship with the world is enmity toward God (Jas 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>The discourse of Jesus on the night before his crucifixion contains much teaching about the world. The world cannot receive the Spirit of truth (Jn 14:17). Christ gives a peace that the world cannot give (v 27). Jesus offers love, while the world gives hatred and persecution (15:19-20). The world’s hatred of God is also directed against the followers of Christ (vv 18-21). Although the disciples of Jesus have tribulation “in this world,” they are to be of good cheer, for Jesus has overcome the world (16:33).<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word sometimes translated “world” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aion<\/span><em>,<\/em> which emphasizes the temporal aspect of the world. It is used of time without end, eternity (e.g., Rom 1:25; 2 Cor 11:31; Phil 4:20). <em>See<\/em> Age.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORLD An important NT term from the Greek word kosmos (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings: 1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24). 2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46). 3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13). 4. The total of human existence in this present...","summary_en":"WORLD An important NT term from the Greek word kosmos (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings: 1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24). 2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46). 3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13). 4. The total of human existence in this present...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40060,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance","title_en":"God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>A proper understanding of God’s sovereignty should encourage repentant sinners and faltering believers to call upon God for salvation and to walk secure in his love. Jesus said, “All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out” (Jn 6:37, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Because God has planned and purposed our salvation, we may have assurance that he will accept and forgive those who trust him (Jn 3:16). Christ’s sheep hear his voice and follow him; they will never perish or be snatched out of his hand (Jn 10:29).<\/p>\n<p>Such an attitude of trust in God removes the presumptive pride of the person who trusts his own good works for salvation (Mt 7:21-23; 1 Cor 10:12; Heb 3:12), or the agonizing doubt of the believer who is sensitive to his own sinfulness. Because salvation is by grace (Eph 2:8), the doubting believer may claim the finished and sufficient work of Christ and thus rest secure that God will finish his work in each believer (Phil 1:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>A proper understanding of God’s sovereignty should encourage repentant sinners and faltering believers to call upon God for salvation and to walk secure in his love. Jesus said, “All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out” (Jn 6:37, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Because God has planned and purposed our salvation, we may have assurance that he will accept and forgive those who trust him (Jn 3:16). Christ’s sheep hear his voice and follow him; they will never perish or be snatched out of his hand (Jn 10:29).<\/p>\n<p>Such an attitude of trust in God removes the presumptive pride of the person who trusts his own good works for salvation (Mt 7:21-23; 1 Cor 10:12; Heb 3:12), or the agonizing doubt of the believer who is sensitive to his own sinfulness. Because salvation is by grace (Eph 2:8), the doubting believer may claim the finished and sufficient work of Christ and thus rest secure that God will finish his work in each believer (Phil 1:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance A proper understanding of God’s sovereignty should encourage repentant sinners and faltering believers to call upon God for salvation and to walk secure in his love. Jesus said, “All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out” (Jn 6:37, rsv). Because God has planned and purposed our salvation, we may have assurance that he will accept and forgive those who trust him (Jn 3:16). Christ’s sheep hear his voice and foll...","summary_en":"God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance A proper understanding of God’s sovereignty should encourage repentant sinners and faltering believers to call upon God for salvation and to walk secure in his love. Jesus said, “All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out” (Jn 6:37, rsv). Because God has planned and purposed our salvation, we may have assurance that he will accept and forgive those who trust him (Jn 3:16). Christ’s sheep hear his voice and foll...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40372,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"To Whom Was the Ransom Paid?","title_en":"To Whom Was the Ransom Paid?","content_ro":"<h3>To Whom Was the Ransom Paid?<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>This question has perplexed scholars for hundreds of years. Origen (c. 185–254), a theologian of Alexandria, maintained that the ransom was paid to the devil. Origen’s form of the theory was that Christ cheated the devil by escaping through his resurrection.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Although Jesus Christ defeated Satan and liberates believers from Satan’s bondage, Scripture does not indicate that the ransom was paid to him. God was wronged by human sin, yet he showed his great love in providing redemption (Jn 3:16). God declared humans guilty for their sin and imposed the death penalty for human transgression. Thus Scripture indicated that the ransom was really directed by Christ to the Father. The biblical references to Jesus’ life as a ransom are echoed in the satisfaction views of the atonement.<\/p>\n<p>Anselm of Canterbury in 1098 developed the satisfaction view of the atonement, emphasizing that the honor of God required satisfaction for sin. Later views emphasized the justice of God in requiring payment (ransom) for the just demands of the law and for the removal of the curse of the law, which is death (see Eph 1:7, 14; Col 1:14). Paul emphasized the justice of God, which was met so that he would be just in justifying sinners who believe (Rom 3:23-26).<\/p>\n<p>Reformed theology emphasizes the ransom as being paid by Christ’s death to meet the satisfaction of God’s justice in Christ’s atonement. Without using the term “ransom,” the same implications are carried in such condensed expressions as “Christ died for our sins” (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>To Whom Was the Ransom Paid?<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>This question has perplexed scholars for hundreds of years. Origen (c. 185–254), a theologian of Alexandria, maintained that the ransom was paid to the devil. Origen’s form of the theory was that Christ cheated the devil by escaping through his resurrection.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Although Jesus Christ defeated Satan and liberates believers from Satan’s bondage, Scripture does not indicate that the ransom was paid to him. God was wronged by human sin, yet he showed his great love in providing redemption (Jn 3:16). God declared humans guilty for their sin and imposed the death penalty for human transgression. Thus Scripture indicated that the ransom was really directed by Christ to the Father. The biblical references to Jesus’ life as a ransom are echoed in the satisfaction views of the atonement.<\/p>\n<p>Anselm of Canterbury in 1098 developed the satisfaction view of the atonement, emphasizing that the honor of God required satisfaction for sin. Later views emphasized the justice of God in requiring payment (ransom) for the just demands of the law and for the removal of the curse of the law, which is death (see Eph 1:7, 14; Col 1:14). Paul emphasized the justice of God, which was met so that he would be just in justifying sinners who believe (Rom 3:23-26).<\/p>\n<p>Reformed theology emphasizes the ransom as being paid by Christ’s death to meet the satisfaction of God’s justice in Christ’s atonement. Without using the term “ransom,” the same implications are carried in such condensed expressions as “Christ died for our sins” (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"To Whom Was the Ransom Paid? This question has perplexed scholars for hundreds of years. Origen (c. 185–254), a theologian of Alexandria, maintained that the ransom was paid to the devil. Origen’s form of the theory was that Christ cheated the devil by escaping through his resurrection. Although Jesus Christ defeated Satan and liberates believers from Satan’s bondage, Scripture does not indicate that the ransom was paid to him. God was wronged by human sin, yet he showed his great love in pro...","summary_en":"To Whom Was the Ransom Paid? This question has perplexed scholars for hundreds of years. Origen (c. 185–254), a theologian of Alexandria, maintained that the ransom was paid to the devil. Origen’s form of the theory was that Christ cheated the devil by escaping through his resurrection. Although Jesus Christ defeated Satan and liberates believers from Satan’s bondage, Scripture does not indicate that the ransom was paid to him. God was wronged by human sin, yet he showed his great love in pro...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56359,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:16","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16-21<\/strong> Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16-21<\/strong> Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16-21 Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.","summary_en":"3:16-21 Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56360,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:16","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16<\/strong> The truth that <em>God loved the world<\/em> is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The <em>Son<\/em> came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16<\/strong> The truth that <em>God loved the world<\/em> is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The <em>Son<\/em> came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16 The truth that God loved the world is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The Son came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).","summary_en":"3:16 The truth that God loved the world is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The Son came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83985,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:16","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16-21<\/strong> Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16-21<\/strong> Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16-21 Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.","summary_en":"3:16-21 Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83986,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:16","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16<\/strong> The truth that <em>God loved the world<\/em> is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The <em>Son<\/em> came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16<\/strong> The truth that <em>God loved the world<\/em> is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The <em>Son<\/em> came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16 The truth that God loved the world is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The Son came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).","summary_en":"3:16 The truth that God loved the world is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The Son came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111611,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:16","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16-21<\/strong> Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16-21<\/strong> Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16-21 Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.","summary_en":"3:16-21 Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111612,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:16","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16<\/strong> The truth that <em>God loved the world<\/em> is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The <em>Son<\/em> came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16<\/strong> The truth that <em>God loved the world<\/em> is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The <em>Son<\/em> came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16 The truth that God loved the world is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The Son came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).","summary_en":"3:16 The truth that God loved the world is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The Son came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139237,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:16","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16-21<\/strong> Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16-21<\/strong> Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16-21 Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.","summary_en":"3:16-21 Because there are no quotation marks around Jesus’ speech in the Greek text, translators debate where Jesus’ speech ends and John’s commentary begins; 3:16-21 might be John’s commentary.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139238,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:16","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16<\/strong> The truth that <em>God loved the world<\/em> is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The <em>Son<\/em> came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>3:16<\/strong> The truth that <em>God loved the world<\/em> is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The <em>Son<\/em> came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16 The truth that God loved the world is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The Son came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).","summary_en":"3:16 The truth that God loved the world is basic to Christian understanding (1 Jn 4:9-10). God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation, even to those who oppose him (see “The World” Theme Note). • The Son came to save—not condemn (3:17)—men and women who habitually embrace the darkness (3:19-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":59745,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Fall","title_en":"The Fall","content_ro":"<h3>The Fall<\/h3>\n<p>Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predisposed to sin (Gen 8:21; Job 4:17-21; Pss 51:5; 103:10; 143:2; Prov 20:9), and awaiting death. When the first man and woman ate the fruit in disobedience to God, they forfeited their own innocence and that of their children, the entire human race (Rom 5:12-14; 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49). The expression “original sin” denotes sin’s complete, universal infiltration into individual lives and human society as a result of human rebellion. As people yield to their inherited predisposition to sin, they become responsible for their own wrongdoing (Eccl 7:20; Rom 3:23).<\/p>\n<p>The first man, Adam, introduced sin, but the “second Adam,” Jesus Christ, is sin’s antidote (1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:21). When Christ died as Redeemer, he made God’s salvation from sin available to all (John 3:16; Rom 1:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 3:1-19; 8:21; Exod 34:7; Job 4:17-21; Ps 51:5; Prov 22:15; Ezek 36:16-36; John 8:1-11; Rom 1:18–3:20; 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22; Gal 3:22; 5:17-24; Eph 2:1-10; 1 Jn 3:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Fall<\/h3>\n<p>Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predisposed to sin (Gen 8:21; Job 4:17-21; Pss 51:5; 103:10; 143:2; Prov 20:9), and awaiting death. When the first man and woman ate the fruit in disobedience to God, they forfeited their own innocence and that of their children, the entire human race (Rom 5:12-14; 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49). The expression “original sin” denotes sin’s complete, universal infiltration into individual lives and human society as a result of human rebellion. As people yield to their inherited predisposition to sin, they become responsible for their own wrongdoing (Eccl 7:20; Rom 3:23).<\/p>\n<p>The first man, Adam, introduced sin, but the “second Adam,” Jesus Christ, is sin’s antidote (1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:21). When Christ died as Redeemer, he made God’s salvation from sin available to all (John 3:16; Rom 1:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 3:1-19; 8:21; Exod 34:7; Job 4:17-21; Ps 51:5; Prov 22:15; Ezek 36:16-36; John 8:1-11; Rom 1:18–3:20; 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22; Gal 3:22; 5:17-24; Eph 2:1-10; 1 Jn 3:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Fall Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death. Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predi...","summary_en":"The Fall Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death. Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60872,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant Love","title_en":"God’s Covenant Love","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64066,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Salvation in Isaiah","title_en":"Salvation in Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Salvation in Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah’s name means <em>Yahweh is salvation<\/em>. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word <em>salvation<\/em> sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with <em>righteousness<\/em> to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to restore his people (e.g., 4:2-6; 10:24-34; 40:9-11). Even though punishment and exile were coming because of the people’s wickedness, the Lord would not abandon his people. Rather, he would deliver them: Babylon would fall, and the anguish and humiliation of the Exile would end. Chapters 1–39 anticipate this message, while chapters 40–66 describe it clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah also points to the salvation that God would bring through Jesus Christ. He prophesies about a “Branch” that would come from the line of David who would have the Spirit and would bring justice and righteousness (11:1-5). He also speaks of God’s servant, who would suffer for the sins of the people (52:13–53:12). Jesus fulfilled these prophecies of Isaiah and brought deliverance from sin and death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 27:1; Isa 49:8; 59:15-21; 61:1-3; Luke 4:18-21; John 3:16-17; 12:47; Rom 10:9-13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:27-28; 1 Pet 3:18-21; Rev 7:9-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Salvation in Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah’s name means <em>Yahweh is salvation<\/em>. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word <em>salvation<\/em> sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with <em>righteousness<\/em> to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to restore his people (e.g., 4:2-6; 10:24-34; 40:9-11). Even though punishment and exile were coming because of the people’s wickedness, the Lord would not abandon his people. Rather, he would deliver them: Babylon would fall, and the anguish and humiliation of the Exile would end. Chapters 1–39 anticipate this message, while chapters 40–66 describe it clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah also points to the salvation that God would bring through Jesus Christ. He prophesies about a “Branch” that would come from the line of David who would have the Spirit and would bring justice and righteousness (11:1-5). He also speaks of God’s servant, who would suffer for the sins of the people (52:13–53:12). Jesus fulfilled these prophecies of Isaiah and brought deliverance from sin and death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 27:1; Isa 49:8; 59:15-21; 61:1-3; Luke 4:18-21; John 3:16-17; 12:47; Rom 10:9-13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:27-28; 1 Pet 3:18-21; Rev 7:9-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Salvation in Isaiah Isaiah’s name means Yahweh is salvation. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word salvation sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with righteousness to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8). Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to re...","summary_en":"Salvation in Isaiah Isaiah’s name means Yahweh is salvation. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word salvation sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with righteousness to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8). Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65441,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66043,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66390,"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":67731,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"By Faith","title_en":"By Faith","content_ro":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","summary_en":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87371,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Fall","title_en":"The Fall","content_ro":"<h3>The Fall<\/h3>\n<p>Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predisposed to sin (Gen 8:21; Job 4:17-21; Pss 51:5; 103:10; 143:2; Prov 20:9), and awaiting death. When the first man and woman ate the fruit in disobedience to God, they forfeited their own innocence and that of their children, the entire human race (Rom 5:12-14; 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49). The expression “original sin” denotes sin’s complete, universal infiltration into individual lives and human society as a result of human rebellion. As people yield to their inherited predisposition to sin, they become responsible for their own wrongdoing (Eccl 7:20; Rom 3:23).<\/p>\n<p>The first man, Adam, introduced sin, but the “second Adam,” Jesus Christ, is sin’s antidote (1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:21). When Christ died as Redeemer, he made God’s salvation from sin available to all (John 3:16; Rom 1:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 3:1-19; 8:21; Exod 34:7; Job 4:17-21; Ps 51:5; Prov 22:15; Ezek 36:16-36; John 8:1-11; Rom 1:18–3:20; 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22; Gal 3:22; 5:17-24; Eph 2:1-10; 1 Jn 3:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Fall<\/h3>\n<p>Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predisposed to sin (Gen 8:21; Job 4:17-21; Pss 51:5; 103:10; 143:2; Prov 20:9), and awaiting death. When the first man and woman ate the fruit in disobedience to God, they forfeited their own innocence and that of their children, the entire human race (Rom 5:12-14; 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49). The expression “original sin” denotes sin’s complete, universal infiltration into individual lives and human society as a result of human rebellion. As people yield to their inherited predisposition to sin, they become responsible for their own wrongdoing (Eccl 7:20; Rom 3:23).<\/p>\n<p>The first man, Adam, introduced sin, but the “second Adam,” Jesus Christ, is sin’s antidote (1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:21). When Christ died as Redeemer, he made God’s salvation from sin available to all (John 3:16; Rom 1:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 3:1-19; 8:21; Exod 34:7; Job 4:17-21; Ps 51:5; Prov 22:15; Ezek 36:16-36; John 8:1-11; Rom 1:18–3:20; 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22; Gal 3:22; 5:17-24; Eph 2:1-10; 1 Jn 3:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Fall Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death. Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predi...","summary_en":"The Fall Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death. Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88498,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant Love","title_en":"God’s Covenant Love","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91692,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Salvation in Isaiah","title_en":"Salvation in Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Salvation in Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah’s name means <em>Yahweh is salvation<\/em>. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word <em>salvation<\/em> sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with <em>righteousness<\/em> to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to restore his people (e.g., 4:2-6; 10:24-34; 40:9-11). Even though punishment and exile were coming because of the people’s wickedness, the Lord would not abandon his people. Rather, he would deliver them: Babylon would fall, and the anguish and humiliation of the Exile would end. Chapters 1–39 anticipate this message, while chapters 40–66 describe it clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah also points to the salvation that God would bring through Jesus Christ. He prophesies about a “Branch” that would come from the line of David who would have the Spirit and would bring justice and righteousness (11:1-5). He also speaks of God’s servant, who would suffer for the sins of the people (52:13–53:12). Jesus fulfilled these prophecies of Isaiah and brought deliverance from sin and death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 27:1; Isa 49:8; 59:15-21; 61:1-3; Luke 4:18-21; John 3:16-17; 12:47; Rom 10:9-13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:27-28; 1 Pet 3:18-21; Rev 7:9-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Salvation in Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah’s name means <em>Yahweh is salvation<\/em>. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word <em>salvation<\/em> sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with <em>righteousness<\/em> to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to restore his people (e.g., 4:2-6; 10:24-34; 40:9-11). Even though punishment and exile were coming because of the people’s wickedness, the Lord would not abandon his people. Rather, he would deliver them: Babylon would fall, and the anguish and humiliation of the Exile would end. Chapters 1–39 anticipate this message, while chapters 40–66 describe it clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah also points to the salvation that God would bring through Jesus Christ. He prophesies about a “Branch” that would come from the line of David who would have the Spirit and would bring justice and righteousness (11:1-5). He also speaks of God’s servant, who would suffer for the sins of the people (52:13–53:12). Jesus fulfilled these prophecies of Isaiah and brought deliverance from sin and death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 27:1; Isa 49:8; 59:15-21; 61:1-3; Luke 4:18-21; John 3:16-17; 12:47; Rom 10:9-13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:27-28; 1 Pet 3:18-21; Rev 7:9-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Salvation in Isaiah Isaiah’s name means Yahweh is salvation. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word salvation sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with righteousness to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8). Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to re...","summary_en":"Salvation in Isaiah Isaiah’s name means Yahweh is salvation. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word salvation sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with righteousness to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8). Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93067,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93669,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94016,"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":95357,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"By Faith","title_en":"By Faith","content_ro":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","summary_en":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":114997,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Fall","title_en":"The Fall","content_ro":"<h3>The Fall<\/h3>\n<p>Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predisposed to sin (Gen 8:21; Job 4:17-21; Pss 51:5; 103:10; 143:2; Prov 20:9), and awaiting death. When the first man and woman ate the fruit in disobedience to God, they forfeited their own innocence and that of their children, the entire human race (Rom 5:12-14; 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49). The expression “original sin” denotes sin’s complete, universal infiltration into individual lives and human society as a result of human rebellion. As people yield to their inherited predisposition to sin, they become responsible for their own wrongdoing (Eccl 7:20; Rom 3:23).<\/p>\n<p>The first man, Adam, introduced sin, but the “second Adam,” Jesus Christ, is sin’s antidote (1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:21). When Christ died as Redeemer, he made God’s salvation from sin available to all (John 3:16; Rom 1:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 3:1-19; 8:21; Exod 34:7; Job 4:17-21; Ps 51:5; Prov 22:15; Ezek 36:16-36; John 8:1-11; Rom 1:18–3:20; 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22; Gal 3:22; 5:17-24; Eph 2:1-10; 1 Jn 3:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Fall<\/h3>\n<p>Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predisposed to sin (Gen 8:21; Job 4:17-21; Pss 51:5; 103:10; 143:2; Prov 20:9), and awaiting death. When the first man and woman ate the fruit in disobedience to God, they forfeited their own innocence and that of their children, the entire human race (Rom 5:12-14; 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49). The expression “original sin” denotes sin’s complete, universal infiltration into individual lives and human society as a result of human rebellion. As people yield to their inherited predisposition to sin, they become responsible for their own wrongdoing (Eccl 7:20; Rom 3:23).<\/p>\n<p>The first man, Adam, introduced sin, but the “second Adam,” Jesus Christ, is sin’s antidote (1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:21). When Christ died as Redeemer, he made God’s salvation from sin available to all (John 3:16; Rom 1:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 3:1-19; 8:21; Exod 34:7; Job 4:17-21; Ps 51:5; Prov 22:15; Ezek 36:16-36; John 8:1-11; Rom 1:18–3:20; 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22; Gal 3:22; 5:17-24; Eph 2:1-10; 1 Jn 3:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Fall Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death. Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predi...","summary_en":"The Fall Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death. Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116124,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant Love","title_en":"God’s Covenant Love","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119318,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Salvation in Isaiah","title_en":"Salvation in Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Salvation in Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah’s name means <em>Yahweh is salvation<\/em>. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word <em>salvation<\/em> sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with <em>righteousness<\/em> to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to restore his people (e.g., 4:2-6; 10:24-34; 40:9-11). Even though punishment and exile were coming because of the people’s wickedness, the Lord would not abandon his people. Rather, he would deliver them: Babylon would fall, and the anguish and humiliation of the Exile would end. Chapters 1–39 anticipate this message, while chapters 40–66 describe it clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah also points to the salvation that God would bring through Jesus Christ. He prophesies about a “Branch” that would come from the line of David who would have the Spirit and would bring justice and righteousness (11:1-5). He also speaks of God’s servant, who would suffer for the sins of the people (52:13–53:12). Jesus fulfilled these prophecies of Isaiah and brought deliverance from sin and death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 27:1; Isa 49:8; 59:15-21; 61:1-3; Luke 4:18-21; John 3:16-17; 12:47; Rom 10:9-13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:27-28; 1 Pet 3:18-21; Rev 7:9-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Salvation in Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah’s name means <em>Yahweh is salvation<\/em>. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word <em>salvation<\/em> sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with <em>righteousness<\/em> to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to restore his people (e.g., 4:2-6; 10:24-34; 40:9-11). Even though punishment and exile were coming because of the people’s wickedness, the Lord would not abandon his people. Rather, he would deliver them: Babylon would fall, and the anguish and humiliation of the Exile would end. Chapters 1–39 anticipate this message, while chapters 40–66 describe it clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah also points to the salvation that God would bring through Jesus Christ. He prophesies about a “Branch” that would come from the line of David who would have the Spirit and would bring justice and righteousness (11:1-5). He also speaks of God’s servant, who would suffer for the sins of the people (52:13–53:12). Jesus fulfilled these prophecies of Isaiah and brought deliverance from sin and death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 27:1; Isa 49:8; 59:15-21; 61:1-3; Luke 4:18-21; John 3:16-17; 12:47; Rom 10:9-13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:27-28; 1 Pet 3:18-21; Rev 7:9-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Salvation in Isaiah Isaiah’s name means Yahweh is salvation. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word salvation sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with righteousness to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8). Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to re...","summary_en":"Salvation in Isaiah Isaiah’s name means Yahweh is salvation. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word salvation sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with righteousness to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8). Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120693,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121295,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121642,"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":122983,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"By Faith","title_en":"By Faith","content_ro":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","summary_en":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142623,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Fall","title_en":"The Fall","content_ro":"<h3>The Fall<\/h3>\n<p>Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predisposed to sin (Gen 8:21; Job 4:17-21; Pss 51:5; 103:10; 143:2; Prov 20:9), and awaiting death. When the first man and woman ate the fruit in disobedience to God, they forfeited their own innocence and that of their children, the entire human race (Rom 5:12-14; 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49). The expression “original sin” denotes sin’s complete, universal infiltration into individual lives and human society as a result of human rebellion. As people yield to their inherited predisposition to sin, they become responsible for their own wrongdoing (Eccl 7:20; Rom 3:23).<\/p>\n<p>The first man, Adam, introduced sin, but the “second Adam,” Jesus Christ, is sin’s antidote (1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:21). When Christ died as Redeemer, he made God’s salvation from sin available to all (John 3:16; Rom 1:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 3:1-19; 8:21; Exod 34:7; Job 4:17-21; Ps 51:5; Prov 22:15; Ezek 36:16-36; John 8:1-11; Rom 1:18–3:20; 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22; Gal 3:22; 5:17-24; Eph 2:1-10; 1 Jn 3:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Fall<\/h3>\n<p>Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predisposed to sin (Gen 8:21; Job 4:17-21; Pss 51:5; 103:10; 143:2; Prov 20:9), and awaiting death. When the first man and woman ate the fruit in disobedience to God, they forfeited their own innocence and that of their children, the entire human race (Rom 5:12-14; 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49). The expression “original sin” denotes sin’s complete, universal infiltration into individual lives and human society as a result of human rebellion. As people yield to their inherited predisposition to sin, they become responsible for their own wrongdoing (Eccl 7:20; Rom 3:23).<\/p>\n<p>The first man, Adam, introduced sin, but the “second Adam,” Jesus Christ, is sin’s antidote (1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:21). When Christ died as Redeemer, he made God’s salvation from sin available to all (John 3:16; Rom 1:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 3:1-19; 8:21; Exod 34:7; Job 4:17-21; Ps 51:5; Prov 22:15; Ezek 36:16-36; John 8:1-11; Rom 1:18–3:20; 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22; Gal 3:22; 5:17-24; Eph 2:1-10; 1 Jn 3:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Fall Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death. Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predi...","summary_en":"The Fall Genesis 3 describes how human moral innocence collapsed through rebellion. What God declared as “very good” (Gen 1:31) was no longer completely so. Man and woman ate the fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil, thus breaking God’s command (2:16-17) and attempting to become like God (see 3:5). In doing so, they fell from their sinless state. Alienated from God, one another, and creation, they also became subject to death. Consequently, all humans are “fallen”—born in sin, predi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143750,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant Love","title_en":"God’s Covenant Love","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146944,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Salvation in Isaiah","title_en":"Salvation in Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Salvation in Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah’s name means <em>Yahweh is salvation<\/em>. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word <em>salvation<\/em> sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with <em>righteousness<\/em> to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to restore his people (e.g., 4:2-6; 10:24-34; 40:9-11). Even though punishment and exile were coming because of the people’s wickedness, the Lord would not abandon his people. Rather, he would deliver them: Babylon would fall, and the anguish and humiliation of the Exile would end. Chapters 1–39 anticipate this message, while chapters 40–66 describe it clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah also points to the salvation that God would bring through Jesus Christ. He prophesies about a “Branch” that would come from the line of David who would have the Spirit and would bring justice and righteousness (11:1-5). He also speaks of God’s servant, who would suffer for the sins of the people (52:13–53:12). Jesus fulfilled these prophecies of Isaiah and brought deliverance from sin and death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 27:1; Isa 49:8; 59:15-21; 61:1-3; Luke 4:18-21; John 3:16-17; 12:47; Rom 10:9-13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:27-28; 1 Pet 3:18-21; Rev 7:9-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Salvation in Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah’s name means <em>Yahweh is salvation<\/em>. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word <em>salvation<\/em> sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with <em>righteousness<\/em> to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to restore his people (e.g., 4:2-6; 10:24-34; 40:9-11). Even though punishment and exile were coming because of the people’s wickedness, the Lord would not abandon his people. Rather, he would deliver them: Babylon would fall, and the anguish and humiliation of the Exile would end. Chapters 1–39 anticipate this message, while chapters 40–66 describe it clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah also points to the salvation that God would bring through Jesus Christ. He prophesies about a “Branch” that would come from the line of David who would have the Spirit and would bring justice and righteousness (11:1-5). He also speaks of God’s servant, who would suffer for the sins of the people (52:13–53:12). Jesus fulfilled these prophecies of Isaiah and brought deliverance from sin and death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 27:1; Isa 49:8; 59:15-21; 61:1-3; Luke 4:18-21; John 3:16-17; 12:47; Rom 10:9-13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:27-28; 1 Pet 3:18-21; Rev 7:9-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Salvation in Isaiah Isaiah’s name means Yahweh is salvation. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word salvation sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with righteousness to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8). Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to re...","summary_en":"Salvation in Isaiah Isaiah’s name means Yahweh is salvation. He calls on people to turn away from their many false saviors to the only true Savior and protector. Salvation involves all aspects of existence (physical, spiritual, etc.). For example, the word salvation sometimes occurs in the book of Isaiah together with righteousness to signify a harmonious order where injustice, disgrace, and mourning are absent (45:8; 51:8). Isaiah repeatedly relays the good news that the Lord is coming to re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148319,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148921,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149268,"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":150609,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"By Faith","title_en":"By Faith","content_ro":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","summary_en":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":23606,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Love","title_en":"Love","content_ro":"<h3>LOVE<\/h3>\n<p>Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Sexual love <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ahabah<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dod<\/span><em>)<\/em> is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, <span>rsv<\/span>), but more often “steadfast love” or “loving-kindness.”<\/p>\n<p>The connotation of this significant word is clear in Hosea 2:19-20: “I will make you my wife forever, showing you righteousness and justice, unfailing love and compassion. I will be faithful to you and make you mine, and you will finally know me as <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>); in Job 6:14-15, where kindness is compared with treachery; and in 1 Samuel 20:8, which speaks of covenanted kindness. This unshakable, steadfast love of God is contrasted with the unpredictable, capricious moods of heathen deities. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Hesed<\/span> is not an emotional response to beauty, merit, or kindness but rather a moral attitude dedicated to another’s good, whether or not that other is lovable, worthy, or responsive (see Dt 7:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>This enduring loyalty, rooted in an unswerving purpose of good, could be stern, determined to discipline a wayward people, as several prophets warned. But God’s love does not change. Through exile and failure it persisted with infinite patience, neither condoning evil nor abandoning the evildoers. It has within it kindness, tenderness, and compassion (Pss 86:15; 103:1-18; 136; Hos 11:1-4), but its chief characteristic is an accepted moral obligation for another’s welfare.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, response was expected. The Law enjoined wholehearted love and gratitude for God’s choosing and redeeming of Israel (Dt 6:20-25). This was to be shown in worship and especially in humane treatment of the poor, the defenseless, the resident alien, slaves, widows, and all suffering oppression and cruelty. Hosea similarly expected steadfast love among people to result from the steadfast love of God toward people (Hos 6:6; 7:1-7; 10:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Love for God and for “your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18) are thus linked in Israel’s law and prophecy. While much love of another kind lies within the OT, these are the major points: God’s loving initiative, the moral quality of love, and the close relationship between love for God with loving others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Of the Greek words available to describe love, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eros<\/span> (sexual love) does not occur in the NT. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Phileo<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection, occurs some 25 times, with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philadelphia<\/span> (brotherly love) five times, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philia<\/span> (friendship) only in James 4:4. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Storge<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection between relatives, appears occasionally in compounds. By far the most frequent word is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span><em>,<\/em> generally assumed to mean moral goodwill that proceeds from esteem, principle, or duty rather than attraction of charm. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is very similar in meaning to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span> in that both denote dedication. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> specifically means to love the undeserving, despite disappointment and rejection. The difference between <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phileo<\/span> is difficult to sustain in all passages. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is especially appropriate for divine love. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> was long believed to be a Christian coinage, but pagan occurrences have recently been claimed. The verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> was frequent in the Greek OT. Though <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span> has more to do with moral principle than with inclination or liking, it never means the cold religious kindness shown from duty alone, as scriptural examples abundantly prove.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>In a sinful and suffering world, Jesus’ divine love showed itself supremely in compassion and healing for the distressed and in redemptive concern for the alienated and the self-despairing. Hence, the kingdom Christ proclaimed offered good news to the poor, captives, blind, and oppressed (Mt 11:2-5; Lk 4:18), while the attitude of Jesus toward those ostracized, despised, or grieving over sin in some far country of the soul assured them of forgiveness and a welcome return to the Father’s house (Lk 15). Such forgiveness was free, its only precondition being readiness to receive it in repentance and faith.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the good news of divine love does impose its own obligation: to love God and to love others as God does (Mt 5:44-48). The first and greatest commandment in God’s law is “You shall love the Lord your God. . . . And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Mt 22:35-40, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Lv 19:18; Dt 6:5).<\/p>\n<p>The first commandment is not identical with, lost in, or only fulfilled through the second; it is separate and primary. What Jesus meant by loving God is indicated by his own habits of public worship, private prayer, and absolute obedience. Love for one’s neighbor is nowhere defined but everywhere illustrated. In the parable of the good Samaritan, “neighbor” is shown to mean anyone near enough to help, and love involves whatever service the neighbor’s situation demands. The parable of the sheep and goats shows love feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and the imprisoned. In the untiring example of Jesus, love heals, teaches, adapts instruction to the hearers by parable and symbolic language, defends those criticized or despised, pronounces forgiveness, comforts the bereaved, befriends the lonely. We are to love others as he has loved us and as we love ourselves. Such imaginative transfer of self-love does good without expecting return, never returns ill treatment, ensures unfailing courtesy even to the lowliest, sustains thoughtful understanding that tempers judgment.<\/p>\n<p>To Jesus, the outstanding sin was lovelessness, the willful omission of any possible good, passing by on the other side while others suffer, ignoring the destitute at one’s gate, withholding forgiveness. Lovelessness was made worse by self-righteousness, censoriousness, the religious insensitivity that ignores another’s distress to preserve some petty ritual regulation. In the end, obedience to or neglect of the law of love will determine everyone’s eternal destiny (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of Paul<\/h5>\n<p>The apostolic church quickly grasped the revolutionary principle that love is enough. Paul’s declaration that love fulfills the whole law is almost a quotation from Jesus. His exposition of various commandments against adultery, killing, stealing, and coveting is summarized in loving, because love can do no wrong to a neighbor (Rom 13:8-10). Ephesians 4:25–5:2 makes the same point another way: all bitterness, anger, lying, stealing, slander, and malice are to be replaced by tenderness, forgiveness, and kindness.<\/p>\n<p>Love is, for Paul, “the law of Christ,” supreme and sufficient (Gal 5:14; 6:2), and Paul neatly defines what alone “avails” in Christianity as “faith working through love” (5:6). He insists that the supreme manifestation of the Spirit that Christians should covet is “the more excellent way” of love (1 Cor 12:27–13:13; cf. Rom 5:5; Gal 5:22). Here, too, he contrasts love with five other expressions of religious zeal much prized at Corinth in order to show that each is profitless without love (1 Cor 13:1-3). He ends the chapter by comparing love with faith and hope, the other enduring elements of religious experience, and declares love to be the greatest.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s description of love in action includes liberality, acts of mercy, and hospitality; avoidance of revenge; sympathy; rejoicing with others; sharing of weakness, shame, or need; restoring, supporting, and edifying others, giving them all honor, kindness, forgiveness, encouragement; restraining criticism, even of the divisive, overscrupulous “weaker brother”—the list is almost endless. More generally, love is revealed as a quality of activity, of thinking, and of suffering (1 Cor 13:4-8). In brief, love does no harm and omits no good; it is God’s law.<\/p>\n<p>According to Paul, God showed his love for us in that Christ died for us. Because of his great love, he made us alive in Christ; in that love we live, by it we conquer, and from it nothing shall separate us (Rom 5:8; 8:32-39; 2 Cor 13:14; Eph 2:4; 2 Thes 2:16; Ti 3:4-5). Our love reflects the love first “poured into our hearts” (Rom 5:5), and it is directed toward Christ (1 Cor 7; 16:22; Eph 6:24) and toward others, whom we love for his sake.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of John<\/h5>\n<p>What John later recalled, and reflected upon, forms the crown of biblical teaching about love. For John, love was the foundation of all that had happened—“God so loved the world” (Jn 3:16; 16:27; 17:23). This is how we know love at all: Christ laid down his life for us (1 Jn 3:16). The mutual love of Father, Son, and disciples must be the fundamental fact in Christianity because God himself is love (4:8, 16).<\/p>\n<p>We know this by the Incarnation and by the cross (1 Jn 4:9-10). Thus we know and believe the love God has for us, and that love itself is divine (“of God”). It follows that “he who loves is born of God.” “He who does not love does not know God.” Such a person “is in the darkness,” “is not of God,” and “remains in death.” No one has ever seen God; nevertheless “if we love, . . . God abides in us” and we in God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s love is thus prior and original; if we love at all, it is “because he first loved.” Our love is directed first toward God, and John is exceedingly searching in his tests of that Godward love. It demands that we “love not the world,” that we “keep his word [and] his commandments,” and that we love our Christian brothers and sisters. This commandment we received from Christ, “that he who loves God should love his brother also,” for “if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.” Twelve times John stressed the duty of mutual loyalty and love. Indeed, if one closes his heart against his brother or sister, “how does God’s love abide in him?”<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis upon the mutual love of Christians has been held a serious limitation of the love Jesus required. “Your brother” appears to have supplanted “your neighbor.” In this respect the commandment given in the upper room (Jn 13:34) is “new” compared with that in Matthew 22:39 (citing Lv 19:18), and the circumstances explain why. The night on which Jesus was betrayed was shadowed by the surrounding world’s hostility, the imminent crucifixion, and the defection of Judas. All the future depended upon the mutual loyalty of the 11 disciples, standing together under social pressure. By the time of John’s letter, new defections had rent the church. A perversion of the gospel called Gnosticism, essentially intellectualist, proud, “giving no heed to love” (Ignatius), had drawn away leaders and adherents (1 Jn 2:19, 26). Once again mutual loyalty was all-important, and John wrote expressly to consolidate and maintain the apostolic fellowship (1 Jn 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, love for one’s fellow Christians does not exclude, but instead leads on to, a wider love (cf. 2 Pt 1:7). John insists that God loved the whole world (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:14). Moreover, if love fails within the Christian fellowship, it certainly will not flourish beyond it but evaporate in mere words (1 Jn 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In countering the loveless conceit of Gnostic Christianity, John’s concern was with the basic commandment of love to God and people as at once the criterion and the consummation of true Christian life. He does not, therefore, detail the many-sided expressions of love. For description of love in action, his mind recalls Christ’s words about “keeping commandments” and “laying down life” in sacrifice (Jn 15:10, 13; 1 Jn 3:16), and he mentioned especially love’s noticing a brother’s need, and so sharing this world’s goods (v 17). Terse as these expressions are, they contain the heart of Christian love. John’s forthright realism in testing all religious claims ensures that for him love could be no vague sentimentalism.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian ideal can only be socially fulfilled within a disciple band, a divine kingdom, the Father’s family, the Christian fellowship. In Scripture, love is no abstract idea, conceived to provide a self-explanatory, self-motivating “norm” to resolve the problem in every moral situation. It is rooted in the divine nature, expressed in the coming and death of Christ, experienced in salvation, and so kindled within the saved. Thus it is central, essential, and indispensable to Christianity. For God is love.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Mercy; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LOVE<\/h3>\n<p>Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Sexual love <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ahabah<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dod<\/span><em>)<\/em> is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, <span>rsv<\/span>), but more often “steadfast love” or “loving-kindness.”<\/p>\n<p>The connotation of this significant word is clear in Hosea 2:19-20: “I will make you my wife forever, showing you righteousness and justice, unfailing love and compassion. I will be faithful to you and make you mine, and you will finally know me as <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>); in Job 6:14-15, where kindness is compared with treachery; and in 1 Samuel 20:8, which speaks of covenanted kindness. This unshakable, steadfast love of God is contrasted with the unpredictable, capricious moods of heathen deities. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Hesed<\/span> is not an emotional response to beauty, merit, or kindness but rather a moral attitude dedicated to another’s good, whether or not that other is lovable, worthy, or responsive (see Dt 7:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>This enduring loyalty, rooted in an unswerving purpose of good, could be stern, determined to discipline a wayward people, as several prophets warned. But God’s love does not change. Through exile and failure it persisted with infinite patience, neither condoning evil nor abandoning the evildoers. It has within it kindness, tenderness, and compassion (Pss 86:15; 103:1-18; 136; Hos 11:1-4), but its chief characteristic is an accepted moral obligation for another’s welfare.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, response was expected. The Law enjoined wholehearted love and gratitude for God’s choosing and redeeming of Israel (Dt 6:20-25). This was to be shown in worship and especially in humane treatment of the poor, the defenseless, the resident alien, slaves, widows, and all suffering oppression and cruelty. Hosea similarly expected steadfast love among people to result from the steadfast love of God toward people (Hos 6:6; 7:1-7; 10:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Love for God and for “your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18) are thus linked in Israel’s law and prophecy. While much love of another kind lies within the OT, these are the major points: God’s loving initiative, the moral quality of love, and the close relationship between love for God with loving others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Of the Greek words available to describe love, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eros<\/span> (sexual love) does not occur in the NT. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Phileo<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection, occurs some 25 times, with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philadelphia<\/span> (brotherly love) five times, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philia<\/span> (friendship) only in James 4:4. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Storge<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection between relatives, appears occasionally in compounds. By far the most frequent word is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span><em>,<\/em> generally assumed to mean moral goodwill that proceeds from esteem, principle, or duty rather than attraction of charm. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is very similar in meaning to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span> in that both denote dedication. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> specifically means to love the undeserving, despite disappointment and rejection. The difference between <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phileo<\/span> is difficult to sustain in all passages. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is especially appropriate for divine love. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> was long believed to be a Christian coinage, but pagan occurrences have recently been claimed. The verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> was frequent in the Greek OT. Though <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span> has more to do with moral principle than with inclination or liking, it never means the cold religious kindness shown from duty alone, as scriptural examples abundantly prove.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>In a sinful and suffering world, Jesus’ divine love showed itself supremely in compassion and healing for the distressed and in redemptive concern for the alienated and the self-despairing. Hence, the kingdom Christ proclaimed offered good news to the poor, captives, blind, and oppressed (Mt 11:2-5; Lk 4:18), while the attitude of Jesus toward those ostracized, despised, or grieving over sin in some far country of the soul assured them of forgiveness and a welcome return to the Father’s house (Lk 15). Such forgiveness was free, its only precondition being readiness to receive it in repentance and faith.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the good news of divine love does impose its own obligation: to love God and to love others as God does (Mt 5:44-48). The first and greatest commandment in God’s law is “You shall love the Lord your God. . . . And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Mt 22:35-40, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Lv 19:18; Dt 6:5).<\/p>\n<p>The first commandment is not identical with, lost in, or only fulfilled through the second; it is separate and primary. What Jesus meant by loving God is indicated by his own habits of public worship, private prayer, and absolute obedience. Love for one’s neighbor is nowhere defined but everywhere illustrated. In the parable of the good Samaritan, “neighbor” is shown to mean anyone near enough to help, and love involves whatever service the neighbor’s situation demands. The parable of the sheep and goats shows love feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and the imprisoned. In the untiring example of Jesus, love heals, teaches, adapts instruction to the hearers by parable and symbolic language, defends those criticized or despised, pronounces forgiveness, comforts the bereaved, befriends the lonely. We are to love others as he has loved us and as we love ourselves. Such imaginative transfer of self-love does good without expecting return, never returns ill treatment, ensures unfailing courtesy even to the lowliest, sustains thoughtful understanding that tempers judgment.<\/p>\n<p>To Jesus, the outstanding sin was lovelessness, the willful omission of any possible good, passing by on the other side while others suffer, ignoring the destitute at one’s gate, withholding forgiveness. Lovelessness was made worse by self-righteousness, censoriousness, the religious insensitivity that ignores another’s distress to preserve some petty ritual regulation. In the end, obedience to or neglect of the law of love will determine everyone’s eternal destiny (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of Paul<\/h5>\n<p>The apostolic church quickly grasped the revolutionary principle that love is enough. Paul’s declaration that love fulfills the whole law is almost a quotation from Jesus. His exposition of various commandments against adultery, killing, stealing, and coveting is summarized in loving, because love can do no wrong to a neighbor (Rom 13:8-10). Ephesians 4:25–5:2 makes the same point another way: all bitterness, anger, lying, stealing, slander, and malice are to be replaced by tenderness, forgiveness, and kindness.<\/p>\n<p>Love is, for Paul, “the law of Christ,” supreme and sufficient (Gal 5:14; 6:2), and Paul neatly defines what alone “avails” in Christianity as “faith working through love” (5:6). He insists that the supreme manifestation of the Spirit that Christians should covet is “the more excellent way” of love (1 Cor 12:27–13:13; cf. Rom 5:5; Gal 5:22). Here, too, he contrasts love with five other expressions of religious zeal much prized at Corinth in order to show that each is profitless without love (1 Cor 13:1-3). He ends the chapter by comparing love with faith and hope, the other enduring elements of religious experience, and declares love to be the greatest.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s description of love in action includes liberality, acts of mercy, and hospitality; avoidance of revenge; sympathy; rejoicing with others; sharing of weakness, shame, or need; restoring, supporting, and edifying others, giving them all honor, kindness, forgiveness, encouragement; restraining criticism, even of the divisive, overscrupulous “weaker brother”—the list is almost endless. More generally, love is revealed as a quality of activity, of thinking, and of suffering (1 Cor 13:4-8). In brief, love does no harm and omits no good; it is God’s law.<\/p>\n<p>According to Paul, God showed his love for us in that Christ died for us. Because of his great love, he made us alive in Christ; in that love we live, by it we conquer, and from it nothing shall separate us (Rom 5:8; 8:32-39; 2 Cor 13:14; Eph 2:4; 2 Thes 2:16; Ti 3:4-5). Our love reflects the love first “poured into our hearts” (Rom 5:5), and it is directed toward Christ (1 Cor 7; 16:22; Eph 6:24) and toward others, whom we love for his sake.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of John<\/h5>\n<p>What John later recalled, and reflected upon, forms the crown of biblical teaching about love. For John, love was the foundation of all that had happened—“God so loved the world” (Jn 3:16; 16:27; 17:23). This is how we know love at all: Christ laid down his life for us (1 Jn 3:16). The mutual love of Father, Son, and disciples must be the fundamental fact in Christianity because God himself is love (4:8, 16).<\/p>\n<p>We know this by the Incarnation and by the cross (1 Jn 4:9-10). Thus we know and believe the love God has for us, and that love itself is divine (“of God”). It follows that “he who loves is born of God.” “He who does not love does not know God.” Such a person “is in the darkness,” “is not of God,” and “remains in death.” No one has ever seen God; nevertheless “if we love, . . . God abides in us” and we in God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s love is thus prior and original; if we love at all, it is “because he first loved.” Our love is directed first toward God, and John is exceedingly searching in his tests of that Godward love. It demands that we “love not the world,” that we “keep his word [and] his commandments,” and that we love our Christian brothers and sisters. This commandment we received from Christ, “that he who loves God should love his brother also,” for “if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.” Twelve times John stressed the duty of mutual loyalty and love. Indeed, if one closes his heart against his brother or sister, “how does God’s love abide in him?”<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis upon the mutual love of Christians has been held a serious limitation of the love Jesus required. “Your brother” appears to have supplanted “your neighbor.” In this respect the commandment given in the upper room (Jn 13:34) is “new” compared with that in Matthew 22:39 (citing Lv 19:18), and the circumstances explain why. The night on which Jesus was betrayed was shadowed by the surrounding world’s hostility, the imminent crucifixion, and the defection of Judas. All the future depended upon the mutual loyalty of the 11 disciples, standing together under social pressure. By the time of John’s letter, new defections had rent the church. A perversion of the gospel called Gnosticism, essentially intellectualist, proud, “giving no heed to love” (Ignatius), had drawn away leaders and adherents (1 Jn 2:19, 26). Once again mutual loyalty was all-important, and John wrote expressly to consolidate and maintain the apostolic fellowship (1 Jn 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, love for one’s fellow Christians does not exclude, but instead leads on to, a wider love (cf. 2 Pt 1:7). John insists that God loved the whole world (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:14). Moreover, if love fails within the Christian fellowship, it certainly will not flourish beyond it but evaporate in mere words (1 Jn 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In countering the loveless conceit of Gnostic Christianity, John’s concern was with the basic commandment of love to God and people as at once the criterion and the consummation of true Christian life. He does not, therefore, detail the many-sided expressions of love. For description of love in action, his mind recalls Christ’s words about “keeping commandments” and “laying down life” in sacrifice (Jn 15:10, 13; 1 Jn 3:16), and he mentioned especially love’s noticing a brother’s need, and so sharing this world’s goods (v 17). Terse as these expressions are, they contain the heart of Christian love. John’s forthright realism in testing all religious claims ensures that for him love could be no vague sentimentalism.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian ideal can only be socially fulfilled within a disciple band, a divine kingdom, the Father’s family, the Christian fellowship. In Scripture, love is no abstract idea, conceived to provide a self-explanatory, self-motivating “norm” to resolve the problem in every moral situation. It is rooted in the divine nature, expressed in the coming and death of Christ, experienced in salvation, and so kindled within the saved. Thus it is central, essential, and indispensable to Christianity. For God is love.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Mercy; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LOVE Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term. In the Old Testament Sexual love (ahabah and dod) is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word hesed, which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, rsv), but more often “steadfast love” or “lovin...","summary_en":"LOVE Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term. In the Old Testament Sexual love (ahabah and dod) is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word hesed, which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, rsv), but more often “steadfast love” or “lovin...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":19696,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26028,"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":35893,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37858,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Unpardonable Sin*","title_en":"the Unpardonable Sin*","content_ro":"<h3>UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The<\/h3>\n<p>Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of God’s power to Beelzebul, the devil (Mt 12:24). Several Scriptures reveal that many Jews had expressed the same kind of fallacious opinion, namely, that Jesus was performing miracles by the power of the devil (Mt 9:34; 11:18; Lk 7:33; 11:14-20; Jn 7:20; 8:48, 52; 10:20). A group of Jews, mostly Pharisees, were guilty of attributing to the devil what was the work of the Spirit demonstrated through the Lord Jesus. They committed <em>the<\/em> unpardonable sin when they said that Jesus’ actions, performed by the power of the Holy Spirit, originated from Beelzebul, the devil. Put simply, they sinned grievously by boldly characterizing Jesus’ work as coming from the devil. Interestingly, many Jews perpetuated this false characterization about Jesus long after his death. They did not deny that he did miracles; they said he did miracles by the power of the devil.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatIsnttheUnpardonableSin\">What Isn’t the Unpardonable Sin<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not Israel’s rebellion against God, even though this rebellion resulted in the eternal judgment of thousands and a temporary elimination of God’s blessing. The “sin unto death” mentioned by John (1 Jn 5:16-17) is not the unpardonable sin. It would be impossible for a person who has redemption and the forgiveness of sin (Eph 1:7), cleansing for present and future sin (1 Jn 1:7), and eternal life (Jn 3:16) to commit an unpardonable sin. But those who commit the “sin unto death” are all Christians. First John 5:16 says the person who commits the “sin unto death” is a “brother” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not rejection of the Lord Jesus, until the rejecter dies in his unbelief. Such a sin will not be forgiven throughout eternity, but it is not the same sin as that which Jesus condemned with these words: “Anyone who blasphemes against me, the Son of Man, can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, either in this world or in the world to come” (Mt 12:32, <span>nlt<\/span>). Numerous passages repeat the warning that unbelief in the Savior results in eternal death (Jn 3:18, 36; 1 Jn 5:12; Rv 20:15; 21:8), but these Scriptures do not directly speak of the unpardonable sin. Jesus asserted that a person could be an unbeliever in him, even to the degree of speaking against him, yet not be guilty of the unpardonable sin.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Justification, Justified; Sin unto Death.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The<\/h3>\n<p>Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of God’s power to Beelzebul, the devil (Mt 12:24). Several Scriptures reveal that many Jews had expressed the same kind of fallacious opinion, namely, that Jesus was performing miracles by the power of the devil (Mt 9:34; 11:18; Lk 7:33; 11:14-20; Jn 7:20; 8:48, 52; 10:20). A group of Jews, mostly Pharisees, were guilty of attributing to the devil what was the work of the Spirit demonstrated through the Lord Jesus. They committed <em>the<\/em> unpardonable sin when they said that Jesus’ actions, performed by the power of the Holy Spirit, originated from Beelzebul, the devil. Put simply, they sinned grievously by boldly characterizing Jesus’ work as coming from the devil. Interestingly, many Jews perpetuated this false characterization about Jesus long after his death. They did not deny that he did miracles; they said he did miracles by the power of the devil.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatIsnttheUnpardonableSin\">What Isn’t the Unpardonable Sin<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not Israel’s rebellion against God, even though this rebellion resulted in the eternal judgment of thousands and a temporary elimination of God’s blessing. The “sin unto death” mentioned by John (1 Jn 5:16-17) is not the unpardonable sin. It would be impossible for a person who has redemption and the forgiveness of sin (Eph 1:7), cleansing for present and future sin (1 Jn 1:7), and eternal life (Jn 3:16) to commit an unpardonable sin. But those who commit the “sin unto death” are all Christians. First John 5:16 says the person who commits the “sin unto death” is a “brother” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not rejection of the Lord Jesus, until the rejecter dies in his unbelief. Such a sin will not be forgiven throughout eternity, but it is not the same sin as that which Jesus condemned with these words: “Anyone who blasphemes against me, the Son of Man, can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, either in this world or in the world to come” (Mt 12:32, <span>nlt<\/span>). Numerous passages repeat the warning that unbelief in the Savior results in eternal death (Jn 3:18, 36; 1 Jn 5:12; Rv 20:15; 21:8), but these Scriptures do not directly speak of the unpardonable sin. Jesus asserted that a person could be an unbeliever in him, even to the degree of speaking against him, yet not be guilty of the unpardonable sin.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Justification, Justified; Sin unto Death.<\/p>","summary_ro":"UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of Go...","summary_en":"UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of Go...","source":"Articles\/U.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56361,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:18<\/strong> As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s <em>judgment<\/em> on the world <em>has already<\/em> begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of <em>believing in God’s . . . Son<\/em> (3:16-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:18<\/strong> As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s <em>judgment<\/em> on the world <em>has already<\/em> begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of <em>believing in God’s . . . Son<\/em> (3:16-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:18 As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s judgment on the world has already begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of believing in God’s . . . Son (3:16-17).","summary_en":"3:18 As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s judgment on the world has already begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of believing in God’s . . . Son (3:16-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83987,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:18<\/strong> As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s <em>judgment<\/em> on the world <em>has already<\/em> begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of <em>believing in God’s . . . Son<\/em> (3:16-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:18<\/strong> As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s <em>judgment<\/em> on the world <em>has already<\/em> begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of <em>believing in God’s . . . Son<\/em> (3:16-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:18 As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s judgment on the world has already begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of believing in God’s . . . Son (3:16-17).","summary_en":"3:18 As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s judgment on the world has already begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of believing in God’s . . . Son (3:16-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111613,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:18<\/strong> As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s <em>judgment<\/em> on the world <em>has already<\/em> begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of <em>believing in God’s . . . Son<\/em> (3:16-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:18<\/strong> As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s <em>judgment<\/em> on the world <em>has already<\/em> begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of <em>believing in God’s . . . Son<\/em> (3:16-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:18 As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s judgment on the world has already begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of believing in God’s . . . Son (3:16-17).","summary_en":"3:18 As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s judgment on the world has already begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of believing in God’s . . . Son (3:16-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139239,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:18<\/strong> As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s <em>judgment<\/em> on the world <em>has already<\/em> begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of <em>believing in God’s . . . Son<\/em> (3:16-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:18<\/strong> As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s <em>judgment<\/em> on the world <em>has already<\/em> begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of <em>believing in God’s . . . Son<\/em> (3:16-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:18 As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s judgment on the world has already begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of believing in God’s . . . Son (3:16-17).","summary_en":"3:18 As light penetrates and exposes the world’s darkness, God’s judgment on the world has already begun. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have the responsibility of believing in God’s . . . Son (3:16-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66052,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93678,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121304,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148930,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":23310,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Light","title_en":"Light","content_ro":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","summary_en":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26301,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Morning Star","title_en":"Morning Star","content_ro":"<h3>MORNING STAR<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, Venus. The phrase is closely related to the idea of the “dayspring” (Jb 38:12; Lk 1:78) and the “daystar” (2 Pt 1:19). The identity of the star is settled when Christ says, “I am the morning star” (Rv 22:16). It is another way of saying, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). The central concept found in the symbol is that of Christ as light shining in darkness (Lk 2:32; Jn 1:4, 7-9; 3:19; 12:35; 2 Cor 4:6; Eph 5:14; 1 Pt 2:9; 1 Jn 2:8; Rv 21:23). With the birth of the Messiah, the morning star arose—the gospel light dawned (Is 9:1-2; Mt 4:15-16). The phrase points to Christ’s glory, as the source of light, and to his grace in the sharing of life. Christ not only described himself as the morning star but also declared that he gives the morning star to those who overcome (Rv 2:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MORNING STAR<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, Venus. The phrase is closely related to the idea of the “dayspring” (Jb 38:12; Lk 1:78) and the “daystar” (2 Pt 1:19). The identity of the star is settled when Christ says, “I am the morning star” (Rv 22:16). It is another way of saying, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). The central concept found in the symbol is that of Christ as light shining in darkness (Lk 2:32; Jn 1:4, 7-9; 3:19; 12:35; 2 Cor 4:6; Eph 5:14; 1 Pt 2:9; 1 Jn 2:8; Rv 21:23). With the birth of the Messiah, the morning star arose—the gospel light dawned (Is 9:1-2; Mt 4:15-16). The phrase points to Christ’s glory, as the source of light, and to his grace in the sharing of life. Christ not only described himself as the morning star but also declared that he gives the morning star to those who overcome (Rv 2:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"MORNING STAR Literally, Venus. The phrase is closely related to the idea of the “dayspring” (Jb 38:12; Lk 1:78) and the “daystar” (2 Pt 1:19). The identity of the star is settled when Christ says, “I am the morning star” (Rv 22:16). It is another way of saying, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). The central concept found in the symbol is that of Christ as light shining in darkness (Lk 2:32; Jn 1:4, 7-9; 3:19; 12:35; 2 Cor 4:6; Eph 5:14; 1 Pt 2:9; 1 Jn 2:8; Rv 21:23). With th...","summary_en":"MORNING STAR Literally, Venus. The phrase is closely related to the idea of the “dayspring” (Jb 38:12; Lk 1:78) and the “daystar” (2 Pt 1:19). The identity of the star is settled when Christ says, “I am the morning star” (Rv 22:16). It is another way of saying, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). The central concept found in the symbol is that of Christ as light shining in darkness (Lk 2:32; Jn 1:4, 7-9; 3:19; 12:35; 2 Cor 4:6; Eph 5:14; 1 Pt 2:9; 1 Jn 2:8; Rv 21:23). With th...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56362,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:19-20<\/strong> When <em>people<\/em> live in spiritual <em>darkness<\/em><em>,<\/em> they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, <em>their sins will be exposed<\/em> (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:19-20<\/strong> When <em>people<\/em> live in spiritual <em>darkness<\/em><em>,<\/em> they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, <em>their sins will be exposed<\/em> (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:19-20 When people live in spiritual darkness, they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, their sins will be exposed (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).","summary_en":"3:19-20 When people live in spiritual darkness, they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, their sins will be exposed (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83988,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:19-20<\/strong> When <em>people<\/em> live in spiritual <em>darkness<\/em><em>,<\/em> they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, <em>their sins will be exposed<\/em> (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:19-20<\/strong> When <em>people<\/em> live in spiritual <em>darkness<\/em><em>,<\/em> they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, <em>their sins will be exposed<\/em> (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:19-20 When people live in spiritual darkness, they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, their sins will be exposed (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).","summary_en":"3:19-20 When people live in spiritual darkness, they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, their sins will be exposed (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111614,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:19-20<\/strong> When <em>people<\/em> live in spiritual <em>darkness<\/em><em>,<\/em> they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, <em>their sins will be exposed<\/em> (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:19-20<\/strong> When <em>people<\/em> live in spiritual <em>darkness<\/em><em>,<\/em> they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, <em>their sins will be exposed<\/em> (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:19-20 When people live in spiritual darkness, they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, their sins will be exposed (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).","summary_en":"3:19-20 When people live in spiritual darkness, they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, their sins will be exposed (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139240,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:19-20<\/strong> When <em>people<\/em> live in spiritual <em>darkness<\/em><em>,<\/em> they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, <em>their sins will be exposed<\/em> (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:19-20<\/strong> When <em>people<\/em> live in spiritual <em>darkness<\/em><em>,<\/em> they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, <em>their sins will be exposed<\/em> (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:19-20 When people live in spiritual darkness, they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, their sins will be exposed (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).","summary_en":"3:19-20 When people live in spiritual darkness, they do not desire to be enlightened by Jesus, “the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5). Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But the darkness cannot extinguish the light (1:5). Those who refuse to believe live in darkness (cp. 13:30) and stumble because they cannot see (11:10). In the end, however, their sins will be exposed (5:28-30; Rev 20:11-15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65913,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66044,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93539,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93670,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121165,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121296,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148791,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148922,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":23311,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Light","title_en":"Light","content_ro":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","summary_en":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":37746,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Truth","title_en":"Truth","content_ro":"<h3>TRUTH<\/h3>\n<p>That which is real and verifiable by experience.<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1:10-12), and witnessed to by the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13). The OT teaching was never false, but it was shadowy and incomplete in comparison with the revealed truth of the NT. So Christ brought spiritual reality (Jn 1:17), and the Holy Spirit leads believers into the experience of all that is real in Christ (16:13).<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the truth because, being God, his words carry divine authority. They are truth and life (Jn 6:63). In addition, the life of Christ epitomized truthfulness and utter reliability. When people live in obedience to the truth, they themselves are true and reliable. Scripture calls upon people to “do the truth” (Jn 3:21, <span>kjv<\/span>). Those who have experienced God’s reality in Christ know, by experience, that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life (Jn 14:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRUTH<\/h3>\n<p>That which is real and verifiable by experience.<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1:10-12), and witnessed to by the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13). The OT teaching was never false, but it was shadowy and incomplete in comparison with the revealed truth of the NT. So Christ brought spiritual reality (Jn 1:17), and the Holy Spirit leads believers into the experience of all that is real in Christ (16:13).<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the truth because, being God, his words carry divine authority. They are truth and life (Jn 6:63). In addition, the life of Christ epitomized truthfulness and utter reliability. When people live in obedience to the truth, they themselves are true and reliable. Scripture calls upon people to “do the truth” (Jn 3:21, <span>kjv<\/span>). Those who have experienced God’s reality in Christ know, by experience, that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life (Jn 14:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRUTH That which is real and verifiable by experience. In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1...","summary_en":"TRUTH That which is real and verifiable by experience. In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65914,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93540,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121166,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148792,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":406,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of the Acts of the Apostles","title_en":"Book of the Acts of the Apostles","content_ro":"<h3>ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, B<span>ook of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>NT book presenting the history of the early church and written as a sequel to the Gospel of Luke. In the arrangement of the NT books, Acts comes after the four Gospels and before the Epistles.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background and Content<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book of Acts does not state clearly who its writer is, but the general consensus is that Luke was its author.<\/p>\n<p>Early church tradition from the second century states that Acts (as well as the third Gospel) was written by a traveling companion and fellow worker of the apostle Paul. That companion is identified in Colossians 4:14 as “Luke, the beloved physician” (<span>nasb<\/span>) and mentioned among Paul’s coworkers (Col 4:10-17; see also 2 Tm 4:11; Phlm 1:24).<\/p>\n<p>Strong support for the tradition that the author of Acts was a companion of Paul comes from the second half of the book recounting Paul’s ministry. There, several narratives are told in the first person plural:<\/p>\n<p>1. “That night Paul had a vision. He saw a man from Macedonia in northern Greece, pleading with him, ‘Come over here and help us.’ So we decided to leave for Macedonia at once, for we could only conclude that God was calling us to preach the Good News there” (16:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<li>2. “They went ahead and waited for us at Troas . . . we boarded a ship at Philippi in Macedonia and five days later arrived in Troas, where we stayed a week” (20:5-6, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>3. “When the time came, we set sail for Italy” (27:1, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/li>\n<p>These “we” sections (16:9-18; 20:5–21:18; 27:1–28:16) sound like part of a travel narrative or diary written by an eyewitness who accompanied Paul from Troas to Philippi on his second missionary journey; from Philippi to Miletus on the third; from Miletus to Jerusalem; and from Caesarea to Rome. Since the style and vocabulary of these travel narratives resemble those of the rest of the book, it is highly probably that the diarist was also the author of the entire book.<\/p>\n<p>The sophisticated literary style and polished use of the Greek language in the book, as well as the fact that it is addressed to someone called Theophilus (possibly a high-ranking Roman official), provide strong support for the tradition that Luke was a gentile convert to Christianity. His consistent and frequent use of the Greek OT may indicate that he had been a gentile “God-fearer” before conversion to the new faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginDestination\">Date, Origin, Destination<\/p>\n\n<p>The question of the date and place of the origin of Acts continues to be debated. There are no clear indications in the book itself. With regard to its destination, however, Luke did not leave any doubt. In the opening verse he addresses a certain Theophilus, to whom he had already written an earlier book about the life of Jesus. There can be no doubt that he was referring to the work we know as the Gospel of Luke. In the preface to that Gospel (Lk 1:1-4), Luke clearly stated his purpose for writing and addressed his account to the “most honorable Theophilus.” It is not clear who that person was. Some interpreters think that Theophilus (which means “dear to God” or “lover of God”) stands for Christian readers in general rather than any specific individual. However, the designation “most honorable” argues against such an assumption. That ascription was a common title of honor, designating a person with official standing in the Roman sociopolitical order (cf. use of the title for Felix, Acts 23:26; 24:2; and for Festus, 26:25). It is thus likely that Luke intended his two-volume work for an official representative of Roman society.<\/p>\n<p>When was Acts written? Some scholars date it in the last quarter of the first century. Since the Gospel was written first, and since Luke based his story of Jesus on eyewitness accounts and written sources (among which was possibly the Gospel of Mark, probably written in the 60s), Acts should not be dated much before <span>AD<\/span> 85. Proponents of such a late date claim support from the theology of Acts, which they see as picturing a Christian church settled into history, adjusted to the prospect of a lengthy period before the Lord’s return. Since expectation of the Lord’s imminent return was fanned into a living flame by the Jewish revolt and the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, time must be allowed for that flame to have died down a bit.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars date Acts around <span>AD<\/span> 70 or shortly thereafter. The Jewish rebellion of <span>AD<\/span> 66–70, which culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem, brought the Jewish faith—legal until then—into disrepute. The Christian movement, which had been accepted as a Jewish sect, became suspect. Christians were increasingly charged with being enemies of Rome. A study of Acts shows that among a number of purposes (see below), Luke seems to have been defending the Christians against the charge of hostility toward the state. He showed how Roman officials repeatedly testified to the complete innocence of Christians and above all else of Paul (16:39; 18:14-17; 19:37; 23:29; 25:25; 26:32). Luke also made it clear that Paul was allowed to carry on his mission with full approval of Roman officials in the very heart of the imperial capital (28:16-31).<\/p>\n<p>A still earlier date, closer to Paul’s Roman imprisonment (early 60s), has been advocated by a number of scholars. There are two compelling reasons: (1) The abrupt ending of Acts, describing Paul carrying on a ministry in Rome before his trial had commenced, may indicate that Luke was writing at that point. It is possible, of course, that Luke ended his story with Paul preaching the gospel in Rome because one of his purposes had been accomplished: namely, showing how the gospel spread from Jerusalem to Rome. But it seems highly unlikely that Luke would close his history without Paul’s defense of the gospel before Caesar himself if that had already happened. (2) The most appropriate period for Luke’s history, with its defense of the Christian movement against all kinds of accusations from both Jews and Gentiles, is the period when Christianity was becoming suspect but was not yet proscribed. That was the time before the start of the persecutions under Nero in <span>AD<\/span> 64. The early date would correspond with the contention that Luke was with Paul during his Roman imprisonment and that he wrote his history in Rome while waiting for Paul’s trial to begin. It is possible that Luke’s work was partially intended to influence the verdict. Luke presented a picture of Christianity and of Paul that he hoped would enable Paul to continue his work among the Gentiles.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BackgroundandContent\">Background and Content<\/p>\n<p>Luke grounds his documentary of the rapid expansion of Christianity in the history of the Roman Empire and Palestine during the three decades from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 60. Some brief historical and geographical considerations will aid in understanding Luke’s history.<\/p>\n<p>Acts 1–12 reports the beginnings of the Christian movement within the imperial province of Syria, which included Judea and Samaria. In the first century <span>AD<\/span>, those regions were generally governed by Roman procurators or puppet kings. At the time of Jesus’ death and resurrection (c. <span>AD<\/span> 30), Pontius Pilate was procurator in Judea and Samaria (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). Galilee was ruled by King Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). Tiberius was emperor of the Roman Empire (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37). The account of Acts 1–12 took place in the period <span>AD<\/span> 30–44.<\/p>\n<p>The conversion of Saul (Acts 9) is generally dated in <span>AD <\/span>33. After Saul’s conversion and departure to his native Tarsus, the church evidently enjoyed a period of tranquility, consolidating its gains and growing steadily (9:31–11:26). It can be assumed, from Galatians 1:18-21 and the existence of Christian communities that Paul and Silas visited on the second missionary tour (Acts 15:40-41), that Paul was not idle during that decade, but intensely involved in the mission to the Gentiles. (After Acts 13:9, the name “Saul” is dropped from the narrative.)<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 41, Claudius became emperor of Rome and installed Herod Agrippa I as king of the Jews. (The procurator Pontius Pilate had been removed several years earlier for inept administration of the region.) Agrippa I was grandson of Herod the Great and his Jewish princess Mariamne. Because of his Jewish roots, he was more popular with his subjects than the former Herods. No doubt it was his desire to increase that popularity and gain the support of the Jewish religious authorities that led to a renewed outbreak of violence against the Jerusalem church. Acts 12 recounts the execution of James (the brother of the apostle John) and the imprisonment of Peter. The story of Agrippa I’s death (12:20-23) is paralleled in an account by the Jewish historian Josephus, who dates the event in <span>AD<\/span> 44.<\/p>\n<p>A second event providing a time reference for the unfolding story of the early church is the collection of famine relief in Antioch for Christians in Judea (11:27-29). Luke stated that a severe famine took place (v 28) during the reign of Emperor Claudius (<span>AD<\/span> 41–54). Josephus, writing his <em>Antiquities<\/em> at the end of the first century, spoke of a severe famine in Palestine between the years <span>AD<\/span> 44 and 48. According to Acts 12:25, Barnabas and Paul finished their mission to famine-stricken Christians in Judea after the death of Agrippa I, making it possible to date their mission about <span>AD<\/span> 45.<\/p>\n<p>At that point in the narrative of Acts, Paul is launched officially into his mission to the Gentiles (13:1-3), for which the history and geography of the larger Roman Empire form the backdrop. The official Roman policy toward the various religions in the empire was one of toleration. That policy, plus use of the Greek language throughout the empire and a phenomenal network of roads and sea routes, paved the way for Paul’s far-ranging missionary work.<\/p>\n<p>The first tour (<span>AD<\/span> 46–47) took Paul and Barnabas through the island province of Cyprus in the northeastern tip of the Mediterranean Sea and into the province of Galatia, where churches were established in several cities of southern Galatia (Antioch of Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe). Galatia is located in Asia Minor, bordered by the Black Sea, the Aegean Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea on its northern, western, and southern sides. Those cities, important colonial outposts for the Romans, contained mixed populations, including large Jewish communities. It was in the synagogues of those communities that Paul launched his missionary efforts, almost always meeting with considerable opposition (chs 13–14).<\/p>\n<p>The deliberation of the Jerusalem Council about differences between Jewish and gentile Christians (ch 15) can be dated in the year <span>AD<\/span> 48. It was followed by Paul’s second missionary journey, which led him through the already evangelized territory of his native Cilicia, Galatia, and through Troas on the Aegean coast to Macedonia and down into Achaia, the Greek Peninsula (15:40–18:22). Churches were established in the important Macedonian cities of Philippi, Thessalonica, and Beroea.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s one and a half years in Corinth (18:11) can be dated with some certainty in <span>AD<\/span> 51–52. An ancient inscription among the ruins of Delphi, a city in central Greece, states that Gallio became proconsul of Achaia in 51. Acts 18:12-17 tells how Paul was accused by antagonistic Jews before Gallio. The implication is that Paul’s adversaries in Corinth felt that a new proconsul could be persuaded to side with their cause. Thus, Paul’s stay in Corinth can be dated around the beginning of Gallio’s proconsulship.<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of Paul’s return to Palestine and the beginning of his third missionary tour brings up a fascinating historical question about what happened to the followers of John the Baptist (13:13–19:7). Acts 18:24-28 refers to a learned Jew, Apollos, who was actively teaching about Jesus in the synagogue at Ephesus, but who was apparently not a member of a distinctively Christian community, not having been baptized in the name of Jesus. He was acquainted only with the baptism of repentance practiced by John the Baptist. After Apollos went to Corinth to minister to the young congregation that Paul founded the previous year, Paul went to Ephesus. There he met several disciples of Jesus who, like Apollos, had experienced John’s baptism of repentance, but who had not been baptized as Christians.<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s reference to Apollos and those disciples, as well as several passages in the Gospels, indicate that the movement begun by John the Baptist did not simply come to an end when Jesus began his ministry. Evidently John continued to baptize until his death (Jn 3:22-24), and many of his disciples maintained John’s work after his death. Probably both Apollos and the disciples at Ephesus were products of the continuing ministry of John’s disciples. Eventually they were introduced to “the way of the Lord” (18:25). Their lack of knowledge about a distinctive Christian baptism or about the reality of the Holy Spirit (19:2-4) shows how much diversity in both belief and practice existed in early Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s third missionary tour began with a three-year ministry in Ephesus (19:1–20:1), continued with a visit to churches established on the previous journey (20:2-12), and came to a climax with his arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21). It took place in the mid-50s (<span>AD<\/span> 53–57). Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem and arraignment before the provincial governor, Felix, in Caesarea (23:23–24:23) must be dated about 57. After Paul had spent two years under house arrest, no doubt prolonged by Felix to gain favor with Jewish subjects, Felix was replaced by Porcius Festus (<span>AD<\/span> 59–60). Josephus noted that Felix was recalled because of an outbreak of civil strife between Jewish and gentile inhabitants of Caesarea and Felix’s unwise handling of the situation.<\/p>\n<p>The new procurator, Festus, was uncertain about what to do with his prisoner. The Jewish leadership sought to seize that opportunity, aware of the desire of new procurators to gain popularity with their subjects (25:1-9). Realizing the threat, Paul appealed his case to the highest court of the empire, presided over by Caesar himself (25:10-12).<\/p>\n<p>Festus was then left with a problem. He had to send with his prisoner a report to the emperor, clearly outlining the charges. Since he did not really comprehend the case (25:25-27), he sought the advice of Herod Agrippa II, who with his sister had come to Caesarea to pay their respects to the new imperial governor of Palestine (25:13). Agrippa II was the son of Herod Agrippa I and, at least in theory, a Jew. He ruled over parts of Palestine from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 100 and had been given the right to appoint the Jewish high priests. His familiarity with Jewish religious traditions and the Law thus put him in a better position to understand Jerusalem’s case against Paul. The outcome of Paul’s appearance before Festus and Agrippa (26:1-29) was recognition of Paul’s innocence (26:31). Yet Paul’s appeal to Rome had to be honored; the law governing such cases had to be followed (26:32).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s relative freedom during the next two-year period (28:30) seems unusual but was a rather common practice in Roman judicial proceedings, especially for Roman citizens who had appealed to the emperor. There is no good reason to believe that Paul was executed at the time when Luke’s narrative ends (c. <span>AD<\/span> 61–62). The great fire of Rome and Nero’s subsequent persecution of Christians were still a few years away (<span>AD<\/span> 64). It is likely that the case against Paul was dismissed, especially in light of the favorable verdict by Festus and King Agrippa. It is also likely that Paul was executed during the later, more general persecution of Christians. Such a sequence would correspond with the tradition cited by Eusebius, a fourth-century church historian, that Paul resumed his ministry and later suffered martyrdom under Nero.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>In the preface to the Gospel, intended to cover the second volume also, Luke told Theophilus (and the audience he represented) that he had set out to write an accurate, orderly account about the beginnings of the Christian movement in the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth (Lk 1:1-4). The opening lines in Acts indicate that the narrative beginning with Jesus of Nazareth (vol 1) is continuing and that Luke’s second volume intends to trace the story from Palestine to Rome (Acts 1:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>While recounting this story, Luke attempted to defend the Christian movement against false charges brought against it. A number of misconceptions attended the birth and growth of the Christian movement. One concerned the relationship between the new faith and Judaism. Many, both within the church and among Roman officials, understood the Christian faith as no more than a particular expression of, or sect within, Judaism. Against that restricted notion, Luke-Acts strikes a universal note. The Gospel proclaims Jesus as Savior of the world (Lk 2:29-32). In Acts, Stephen’s defense before the Jewish council (ch 7), Peter’s experience in Joppa with Cornelius (ch 10), and Paul’s speech at Athens (ch 17) all demonstrate that Christianity is not merely a Jewish sect, some narrow messianic movement, but rather a universal faith. Another problem was popular identification of the new faith with the various religious cults and mystery religions in the Roman Empire. The accounts of the early church’s conflict with Simon the magician (ch 8) and of Paul and Barnabas’s rejection of an attempt to worship them at Lystra (ch 14) undermine the popular charge of superstition. Also, Christianity is not a mystery cult in which esoteric, secret rites bring a worshiper into union with the divine. The Lord worshiped by Christians, said Luke, belongs to real history; he lived his life in Palestine in the then-recent past, openly, for all to observe (see the speeches of Peter and Paul in Acts 2; 10; 13).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s major purpose, however, was defense of Christianity against the charge that it posed a threat to the order and stability of the Roman Empire. There were, of course, grounds for such suspicions. After all, the founder of the movement had been crucified on a charge of sedition by a Roman procurator, and the movement that claimed his name seemed to evoke tumult, disorder, and riots wherever it spread. Luke’s account met those problems head-on. In the Gospel he presented the trial of Jesus as a serious miscarriage of justice. Pilate had handed Jesus over for crucifixion, but he had found Jesus not guilty. Herod Antipas likewise found no substance in the charges against Jesus (Lk 23:13-16; Acts 13:28). A neutral or even friendly attitude of Roman officials toward leading Christians and the movement as a whole is documented throughout Acts. The Roman proconsul of Cyprus, Sergius Paulus, gladly received Paul and Barnabas and responded positively to their message (Acts 13:7-12). The chief magistrate in Philippi apologized for the illegal beating and imprisonment of Paul and Silas (16:37-39). The proconsul of Achaia, Gallio, found Paul guiltless in the eyes of Roman law (18:12-16). In Ephesus the magistrate intervened in a crowd’s attack on Paul and his companions, rejecting the charges against them (19:35-39). A tribune of the Roman military contingent in Jerusalem arrested Paul, but it turned out that he really saved the apostle from the wrath of a mob; in his letter to the procurator Felix, the tribune acknowledged that Paul was not guilty by Roman law (23:26-29). The same verdict was repeated after Paul’s arraignment before Felix, his successor Festus, and Herod Agrippa II: “This man hasn’t done anything worthy of death or imprisonment” (26:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). Luke climaxed his story by telling how Paul carried on his missionary activity in Rome, the very heart of the empire, and with the permission of the imperial guards (28:30-31). It is clear throughout Luke’s defense that the strife that attended the beginnings and progress of Christianity was not due primarily to anything within the movement, but rather to Jewish opposition and falsification.<\/p>\n<p>Within his lengthy apology for the integrity of Christianity, Luke’s specific theological perspectives can be clearly seen. The two volume work presents a grand scheme of the history of redemption, extending from the <em>time of Israel<\/em> (Lk 1–2) through the <em>time of Jesus,<\/em> and continuing through the <em>time of the church,<\/em> when the good news for Israel is extended to all nations. Paralleling that emphasis is an insistence that God is present in the redemptive story through the Holy Spirit. In the Gospel, Jesus is presented as the Man of the Spirit; the reality of the Spirit empowered him for his work (Lk 3:22; 4:1, 14, 18). In Acts, the fellowship of Jesus’ disciples is presented as the community of the Spirit (1:8; 2:1-8). What Jesus in the power of the Spirit had begun in his own ministry, the church in the power of the Spirit continues to do.<\/p>\n<p>For Luke, the empowering presence of God’s Spirit was a reality that gave the new faith its power, integrity, and perseverance. It enabled faithful witness (1:8) and created genuine community (2:44-47; 4:32-37), something for which the ancient world desperately longed. The Spirit in the new community produced courage and boldness (see Peter’s defenses in chs 2–5), empowered for service (ch 6), overcame prejudice as in the mission in Samaria (ch 8), broke down walls as in the Cornelius episode (chs 10–11), and sent believers out on missions (ch 13).<\/p>\n<p>The entire story is also punctuated by the centrality of Jesus’ resurrection. Luke, like Paul (see 1 Cor 15:12-21), must have been convinced that without the resurrection of Jesus there would be no Christian faith at all. More than that, the resurrection put God’s stamp of approval on Jesus’ life and ministry, authenticating the truth of his claims. Luke announced his interest in that theme at the outset: the ultimate criterion for an apostolic replacement for Judas was that he must have been, with the other disciples, a witness to Jesus’ resurrection. Throughout Acts, from Peter’s Pentecost sermon and defenses before the Sanhedrin to Paul’s speeches before Felix and Agrippa, the church is shown bearing witness to Jesus’ resurrection as a great reversal executed by God (2:22-24, 36; 3:14-15; 5:30-31; 10:39-42).<\/p>\n<p>Acts falls naturally into two parts, chapters 1–12, and 13–28. The first part, roughly speaking, contains the “acts of Peter.” Part two is largely concerned with the “acts of Paul.” In the first 12 chapters, Peter is the central figure who initiates the choosing of a replacement for Judas Iscariot (ch 1); addresses the multitudes at Pentecost (ch 2); interprets the significance of the healing of a lame man to a temple crowd (ch 3); delivers a defense of the Christian proclamation before the supreme Jewish council (ch 4); leads the apostles in a healing ministry and speaks for them (ch 5); stands in the forefront of conflict with a Samaritan magician, “Simon the Great” (ch 8); launches—though somewhat unwillingly—the movement of the gospel to the Gentiles through Cornelius (chs 10–11); and draws the fire of Herod’s campaign against the church but is miraculously delivered from prison (ch 12).<\/p>\n<p>Proclamation of the gospel to the Gentiles through Paul’s ministry is the theme of part two of Acts (chs 13–28). The story primarily concerns three major missionary tours, each of which moved the gospel into yet untouched territory and expanded earlier missionary efforts. The account of Paul’s life and work climaxes in his arrest in Jerusalem (chs 21–22), a lengthy imprisonment in Caesarea (chs 23–26), and a voyage to Rome (chs 27–28).<\/p>\n<p>Another way of getting at the structure and content of Acts is thematic. It has its starting point in Jesus’ statement, “You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the ends of the earth” (1:8). Acts can be seen as the story of the fulfillment of that “Great Commission,” unfolding essentially in three stages: (1) witness to Judaism, focused in Jerusalem but also expanding into surrounding Judea and north into Galilee (chs 1–7); (2) witness to Samaria through Philip, Peter, and John (8:1–9:31); (3) witness to the gentile world, first haltingly through Peter (9:32–12:25), and then decisively through Paul (chs 13–28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Luke (Person); Paul, The Apostle; Simon Peter; Theophilus #1; Chronology of the Bible (New Testament).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, B<span>ook of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>NT book presenting the history of the early church and written as a sequel to the Gospel of Luke. In the arrangement of the NT books, Acts comes after the four Gospels and before the Epistles.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background and Content<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book of Acts does not state clearly who its writer is, but the general consensus is that Luke was its author.<\/p>\n<p>Early church tradition from the second century states that Acts (as well as the third Gospel) was written by a traveling companion and fellow worker of the apostle Paul. That companion is identified in Colossians 4:14 as “Luke, the beloved physician” (<span>nasb<\/span>) and mentioned among Paul’s coworkers (Col 4:10-17; see also 2 Tm 4:11; Phlm 1:24).<\/p>\n<p>Strong support for the tradition that the author of Acts was a companion of Paul comes from the second half of the book recounting Paul’s ministry. There, several narratives are told in the first person plural:<\/p>\n<p>1. “That night Paul had a vision. He saw a man from Macedonia in northern Greece, pleading with him, ‘Come over here and help us.’ So we decided to leave for Macedonia at once, for we could only conclude that God was calling us to preach the Good News there” (16:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<li>2. “They went ahead and waited for us at Troas . . . we boarded a ship at Philippi in Macedonia and five days later arrived in Troas, where we stayed a week” (20:5-6, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>3. “When the time came, we set sail for Italy” (27:1, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/li>\n<p>These “we” sections (16:9-18; 20:5–21:18; 27:1–28:16) sound like part of a travel narrative or diary written by an eyewitness who accompanied Paul from Troas to Philippi on his second missionary journey; from Philippi to Miletus on the third; from Miletus to Jerusalem; and from Caesarea to Rome. Since the style and vocabulary of these travel narratives resemble those of the rest of the book, it is highly probably that the diarist was also the author of the entire book.<\/p>\n<p>The sophisticated literary style and polished use of the Greek language in the book, as well as the fact that it is addressed to someone called Theophilus (possibly a high-ranking Roman official), provide strong support for the tradition that Luke was a gentile convert to Christianity. His consistent and frequent use of the Greek OT may indicate that he had been a gentile “God-fearer” before conversion to the new faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginDestination\">Date, Origin, Destination<\/p>\n\n<p>The question of the date and place of the origin of Acts continues to be debated. There are no clear indications in the book itself. With regard to its destination, however, Luke did not leave any doubt. In the opening verse he addresses a certain Theophilus, to whom he had already written an earlier book about the life of Jesus. There can be no doubt that he was referring to the work we know as the Gospel of Luke. In the preface to that Gospel (Lk 1:1-4), Luke clearly stated his purpose for writing and addressed his account to the “most honorable Theophilus.” It is not clear who that person was. Some interpreters think that Theophilus (which means “dear to God” or “lover of God”) stands for Christian readers in general rather than any specific individual. However, the designation “most honorable” argues against such an assumption. That ascription was a common title of honor, designating a person with official standing in the Roman sociopolitical order (cf. use of the title for Felix, Acts 23:26; 24:2; and for Festus, 26:25). It is thus likely that Luke intended his two-volume work for an official representative of Roman society.<\/p>\n<p>When was Acts written? Some scholars date it in the last quarter of the first century. Since the Gospel was written first, and since Luke based his story of Jesus on eyewitness accounts and written sources (among which was possibly the Gospel of Mark, probably written in the 60s), Acts should not be dated much before <span>AD<\/span> 85. Proponents of such a late date claim support from the theology of Acts, which they see as picturing a Christian church settled into history, adjusted to the prospect of a lengthy period before the Lord’s return. Since expectation of the Lord’s imminent return was fanned into a living flame by the Jewish revolt and the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, time must be allowed for that flame to have died down a bit.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars date Acts around <span>AD<\/span> 70 or shortly thereafter. The Jewish rebellion of <span>AD<\/span> 66–70, which culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem, brought the Jewish faith—legal until then—into disrepute. The Christian movement, which had been accepted as a Jewish sect, became suspect. Christians were increasingly charged with being enemies of Rome. A study of Acts shows that among a number of purposes (see below), Luke seems to have been defending the Christians against the charge of hostility toward the state. He showed how Roman officials repeatedly testified to the complete innocence of Christians and above all else of Paul (16:39; 18:14-17; 19:37; 23:29; 25:25; 26:32). Luke also made it clear that Paul was allowed to carry on his mission with full approval of Roman officials in the very heart of the imperial capital (28:16-31).<\/p>\n<p>A still earlier date, closer to Paul’s Roman imprisonment (early 60s), has been advocated by a number of scholars. There are two compelling reasons: (1) The abrupt ending of Acts, describing Paul carrying on a ministry in Rome before his trial had commenced, may indicate that Luke was writing at that point. It is possible, of course, that Luke ended his story with Paul preaching the gospel in Rome because one of his purposes had been accomplished: namely, showing how the gospel spread from Jerusalem to Rome. But it seems highly unlikely that Luke would close his history without Paul’s defense of the gospel before Caesar himself if that had already happened. (2) The most appropriate period for Luke’s history, with its defense of the Christian movement against all kinds of accusations from both Jews and Gentiles, is the period when Christianity was becoming suspect but was not yet proscribed. That was the time before the start of the persecutions under Nero in <span>AD<\/span> 64. The early date would correspond with the contention that Luke was with Paul during his Roman imprisonment and that he wrote his history in Rome while waiting for Paul’s trial to begin. It is possible that Luke’s work was partially intended to influence the verdict. Luke presented a picture of Christianity and of Paul that he hoped would enable Paul to continue his work among the Gentiles.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BackgroundandContent\">Background and Content<\/p>\n<p>Luke grounds his documentary of the rapid expansion of Christianity in the history of the Roman Empire and Palestine during the three decades from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 60. Some brief historical and geographical considerations will aid in understanding Luke’s history.<\/p>\n<p>Acts 1–12 reports the beginnings of the Christian movement within the imperial province of Syria, which included Judea and Samaria. In the first century <span>AD<\/span>, those regions were generally governed by Roman procurators or puppet kings. At the time of Jesus’ death and resurrection (c. <span>AD<\/span> 30), Pontius Pilate was procurator in Judea and Samaria (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). Galilee was ruled by King Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). Tiberius was emperor of the Roman Empire (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37). The account of Acts 1–12 took place in the period <span>AD<\/span> 30–44.<\/p>\n<p>The conversion of Saul (Acts 9) is generally dated in <span>AD <\/span>33. After Saul’s conversion and departure to his native Tarsus, the church evidently enjoyed a period of tranquility, consolidating its gains and growing steadily (9:31–11:26). It can be assumed, from Galatians 1:18-21 and the existence of Christian communities that Paul and Silas visited on the second missionary tour (Acts 15:40-41), that Paul was not idle during that decade, but intensely involved in the mission to the Gentiles. (After Acts 13:9, the name “Saul” is dropped from the narrative.)<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 41, Claudius became emperor of Rome and installed Herod Agrippa I as king of the Jews. (The procurator Pontius Pilate had been removed several years earlier for inept administration of the region.) Agrippa I was grandson of Herod the Great and his Jewish princess Mariamne. Because of his Jewish roots, he was more popular with his subjects than the former Herods. No doubt it was his desire to increase that popularity and gain the support of the Jewish religious authorities that led to a renewed outbreak of violence against the Jerusalem church. Acts 12 recounts the execution of James (the brother of the apostle John) and the imprisonment of Peter. The story of Agrippa I’s death (12:20-23) is paralleled in an account by the Jewish historian Josephus, who dates the event in <span>AD<\/span> 44.<\/p>\n<p>A second event providing a time reference for the unfolding story of the early church is the collection of famine relief in Antioch for Christians in Judea (11:27-29). Luke stated that a severe famine took place (v 28) during the reign of Emperor Claudius (<span>AD<\/span> 41–54). Josephus, writing his <em>Antiquities<\/em> at the end of the first century, spoke of a severe famine in Palestine between the years <span>AD<\/span> 44 and 48. According to Acts 12:25, Barnabas and Paul finished their mission to famine-stricken Christians in Judea after the death of Agrippa I, making it possible to date their mission about <span>AD<\/span> 45.<\/p>\n<p>At that point in the narrative of Acts, Paul is launched officially into his mission to the Gentiles (13:1-3), for which the history and geography of the larger Roman Empire form the backdrop. The official Roman policy toward the various religions in the empire was one of toleration. That policy, plus use of the Greek language throughout the empire and a phenomenal network of roads and sea routes, paved the way for Paul’s far-ranging missionary work.<\/p>\n<p>The first tour (<span>AD<\/span> 46–47) took Paul and Barnabas through the island province of Cyprus in the northeastern tip of the Mediterranean Sea and into the province of Galatia, where churches were established in several cities of southern Galatia (Antioch of Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe). Galatia is located in Asia Minor, bordered by the Black Sea, the Aegean Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea on its northern, western, and southern sides. Those cities, important colonial outposts for the Romans, contained mixed populations, including large Jewish communities. It was in the synagogues of those communities that Paul launched his missionary efforts, almost always meeting with considerable opposition (chs 13–14).<\/p>\n<p>The deliberation of the Jerusalem Council about differences between Jewish and gentile Christians (ch 15) can be dated in the year <span>AD<\/span> 48. It was followed by Paul’s second missionary journey, which led him through the already evangelized territory of his native Cilicia, Galatia, and through Troas on the Aegean coast to Macedonia and down into Achaia, the Greek Peninsula (15:40–18:22). Churches were established in the important Macedonian cities of Philippi, Thessalonica, and Beroea.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s one and a half years in Corinth (18:11) can be dated with some certainty in <span>AD<\/span> 51–52. An ancient inscription among the ruins of Delphi, a city in central Greece, states that Gallio became proconsul of Achaia in 51. Acts 18:12-17 tells how Paul was accused by antagonistic Jews before Gallio. The implication is that Paul’s adversaries in Corinth felt that a new proconsul could be persuaded to side with their cause. Thus, Paul’s stay in Corinth can be dated around the beginning of Gallio’s proconsulship.<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of Paul’s return to Palestine and the beginning of his third missionary tour brings up a fascinating historical question about what happened to the followers of John the Baptist (13:13–19:7). Acts 18:24-28 refers to a learned Jew, Apollos, who was actively teaching about Jesus in the synagogue at Ephesus, but who was apparently not a member of a distinctively Christian community, not having been baptized in the name of Jesus. He was acquainted only with the baptism of repentance practiced by John the Baptist. After Apollos went to Corinth to minister to the young congregation that Paul founded the previous year, Paul went to Ephesus. There he met several disciples of Jesus who, like Apollos, had experienced John’s baptism of repentance, but who had not been baptized as Christians.<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s reference to Apollos and those disciples, as well as several passages in the Gospels, indicate that the movement begun by John the Baptist did not simply come to an end when Jesus began his ministry. Evidently John continued to baptize until his death (Jn 3:22-24), and many of his disciples maintained John’s work after his death. Probably both Apollos and the disciples at Ephesus were products of the continuing ministry of John’s disciples. Eventually they were introduced to “the way of the Lord” (18:25). Their lack of knowledge about a distinctive Christian baptism or about the reality of the Holy Spirit (19:2-4) shows how much diversity in both belief and practice existed in early Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s third missionary tour began with a three-year ministry in Ephesus (19:1–20:1), continued with a visit to churches established on the previous journey (20:2-12), and came to a climax with his arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21). It took place in the mid-50s (<span>AD<\/span> 53–57). Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem and arraignment before the provincial governor, Felix, in Caesarea (23:23–24:23) must be dated about 57. After Paul had spent two years under house arrest, no doubt prolonged by Felix to gain favor with Jewish subjects, Felix was replaced by Porcius Festus (<span>AD<\/span> 59–60). Josephus noted that Felix was recalled because of an outbreak of civil strife between Jewish and gentile inhabitants of Caesarea and Felix’s unwise handling of the situation.<\/p>\n<p>The new procurator, Festus, was uncertain about what to do with his prisoner. The Jewish leadership sought to seize that opportunity, aware of the desire of new procurators to gain popularity with their subjects (25:1-9). Realizing the threat, Paul appealed his case to the highest court of the empire, presided over by Caesar himself (25:10-12).<\/p>\n<p>Festus was then left with a problem. He had to send with his prisoner a report to the emperor, clearly outlining the charges. Since he did not really comprehend the case (25:25-27), he sought the advice of Herod Agrippa II, who with his sister had come to Caesarea to pay their respects to the new imperial governor of Palestine (25:13). Agrippa II was the son of Herod Agrippa I and, at least in theory, a Jew. He ruled over parts of Palestine from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 100 and had been given the right to appoint the Jewish high priests. His familiarity with Jewish religious traditions and the Law thus put him in a better position to understand Jerusalem’s case against Paul. The outcome of Paul’s appearance before Festus and Agrippa (26:1-29) was recognition of Paul’s innocence (26:31). Yet Paul’s appeal to Rome had to be honored; the law governing such cases had to be followed (26:32).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s relative freedom during the next two-year period (28:30) seems unusual but was a rather common practice in Roman judicial proceedings, especially for Roman citizens who had appealed to the emperor. There is no good reason to believe that Paul was executed at the time when Luke’s narrative ends (c. <span>AD<\/span> 61–62). The great fire of Rome and Nero’s subsequent persecution of Christians were still a few years away (<span>AD<\/span> 64). It is likely that the case against Paul was dismissed, especially in light of the favorable verdict by Festus and King Agrippa. It is also likely that Paul was executed during the later, more general persecution of Christians. Such a sequence would correspond with the tradition cited by Eusebius, a fourth-century church historian, that Paul resumed his ministry and later suffered martyrdom under Nero.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>In the preface to the Gospel, intended to cover the second volume also, Luke told Theophilus (and the audience he represented) that he had set out to write an accurate, orderly account about the beginnings of the Christian movement in the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth (Lk 1:1-4). The opening lines in Acts indicate that the narrative beginning with Jesus of Nazareth (vol 1) is continuing and that Luke’s second volume intends to trace the story from Palestine to Rome (Acts 1:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>While recounting this story, Luke attempted to defend the Christian movement against false charges brought against it. A number of misconceptions attended the birth and growth of the Christian movement. One concerned the relationship between the new faith and Judaism. Many, both within the church and among Roman officials, understood the Christian faith as no more than a particular expression of, or sect within, Judaism. Against that restricted notion, Luke-Acts strikes a universal note. The Gospel proclaims Jesus as Savior of the world (Lk 2:29-32). In Acts, Stephen’s defense before the Jewish council (ch 7), Peter’s experience in Joppa with Cornelius (ch 10), and Paul’s speech at Athens (ch 17) all demonstrate that Christianity is not merely a Jewish sect, some narrow messianic movement, but rather a universal faith. Another problem was popular identification of the new faith with the various religious cults and mystery religions in the Roman Empire. The accounts of the early church’s conflict with Simon the magician (ch 8) and of Paul and Barnabas’s rejection of an attempt to worship them at Lystra (ch 14) undermine the popular charge of superstition. Also, Christianity is not a mystery cult in which esoteric, secret rites bring a worshiper into union with the divine. The Lord worshiped by Christians, said Luke, belongs to real history; he lived his life in Palestine in the then-recent past, openly, for all to observe (see the speeches of Peter and Paul in Acts 2; 10; 13).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s major purpose, however, was defense of Christianity against the charge that it posed a threat to the order and stability of the Roman Empire. There were, of course, grounds for such suspicions. After all, the founder of the movement had been crucified on a charge of sedition by a Roman procurator, and the movement that claimed his name seemed to evoke tumult, disorder, and riots wherever it spread. Luke’s account met those problems head-on. In the Gospel he presented the trial of Jesus as a serious miscarriage of justice. Pilate had handed Jesus over for crucifixion, but he had found Jesus not guilty. Herod Antipas likewise found no substance in the charges against Jesus (Lk 23:13-16; Acts 13:28). A neutral or even friendly attitude of Roman officials toward leading Christians and the movement as a whole is documented throughout Acts. The Roman proconsul of Cyprus, Sergius Paulus, gladly received Paul and Barnabas and responded positively to their message (Acts 13:7-12). The chief magistrate in Philippi apologized for the illegal beating and imprisonment of Paul and Silas (16:37-39). The proconsul of Achaia, Gallio, found Paul guiltless in the eyes of Roman law (18:12-16). In Ephesus the magistrate intervened in a crowd’s attack on Paul and his companions, rejecting the charges against them (19:35-39). A tribune of the Roman military contingent in Jerusalem arrested Paul, but it turned out that he really saved the apostle from the wrath of a mob; in his letter to the procurator Felix, the tribune acknowledged that Paul was not guilty by Roman law (23:26-29). The same verdict was repeated after Paul’s arraignment before Felix, his successor Festus, and Herod Agrippa II: “This man hasn’t done anything worthy of death or imprisonment” (26:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). Luke climaxed his story by telling how Paul carried on his missionary activity in Rome, the very heart of the empire, and with the permission of the imperial guards (28:30-31). It is clear throughout Luke’s defense that the strife that attended the beginnings and progress of Christianity was not due primarily to anything within the movement, but rather to Jewish opposition and falsification.<\/p>\n<p>Within his lengthy apology for the integrity of Christianity, Luke’s specific theological perspectives can be clearly seen. The two volume work presents a grand scheme of the history of redemption, extending from the <em>time of Israel<\/em> (Lk 1–2) through the <em>time of Jesus,<\/em> and continuing through the <em>time of the church,<\/em> when the good news for Israel is extended to all nations. Paralleling that emphasis is an insistence that God is present in the redemptive story through the Holy Spirit. In the Gospel, Jesus is presented as the Man of the Spirit; the reality of the Spirit empowered him for his work (Lk 3:22; 4:1, 14, 18). In Acts, the fellowship of Jesus’ disciples is presented as the community of the Spirit (1:8; 2:1-8). What Jesus in the power of the Spirit had begun in his own ministry, the church in the power of the Spirit continues to do.<\/p>\n<p>For Luke, the empowering presence of God’s Spirit was a reality that gave the new faith its power, integrity, and perseverance. It enabled faithful witness (1:8) and created genuine community (2:44-47; 4:32-37), something for which the ancient world desperately longed. The Spirit in the new community produced courage and boldness (see Peter’s defenses in chs 2–5), empowered for service (ch 6), overcame prejudice as in the mission in Samaria (ch 8), broke down walls as in the Cornelius episode (chs 10–11), and sent believers out on missions (ch 13).<\/p>\n<p>The entire story is also punctuated by the centrality of Jesus’ resurrection. Luke, like Paul (see 1 Cor 15:12-21), must have been convinced that without the resurrection of Jesus there would be no Christian faith at all. More than that, the resurrection put God’s stamp of approval on Jesus’ life and ministry, authenticating the truth of his claims. Luke announced his interest in that theme at the outset: the ultimate criterion for an apostolic replacement for Judas was that he must have been, with the other disciples, a witness to Jesus’ resurrection. Throughout Acts, from Peter’s Pentecost sermon and defenses before the Sanhedrin to Paul’s speeches before Felix and Agrippa, the church is shown bearing witness to Jesus’ resurrection as a great reversal executed by God (2:22-24, 36; 3:14-15; 5:30-31; 10:39-42).<\/p>\n<p>Acts falls naturally into two parts, chapters 1–12, and 13–28. The first part, roughly speaking, contains the “acts of Peter.” Part two is largely concerned with the “acts of Paul.” In the first 12 chapters, Peter is the central figure who initiates the choosing of a replacement for Judas Iscariot (ch 1); addresses the multitudes at Pentecost (ch 2); interprets the significance of the healing of a lame man to a temple crowd (ch 3); delivers a defense of the Christian proclamation before the supreme Jewish council (ch 4); leads the apostles in a healing ministry and speaks for them (ch 5); stands in the forefront of conflict with a Samaritan magician, “Simon the Great” (ch 8); launches—though somewhat unwillingly—the movement of the gospel to the Gentiles through Cornelius (chs 10–11); and draws the fire of Herod’s campaign against the church but is miraculously delivered from prison (ch 12).<\/p>\n<p>Proclamation of the gospel to the Gentiles through Paul’s ministry is the theme of part two of Acts (chs 13–28). The story primarily concerns three major missionary tours, each of which moved the gospel into yet untouched territory and expanded earlier missionary efforts. The account of Paul’s life and work climaxes in his arrest in Jerusalem (chs 21–22), a lengthy imprisonment in Caesarea (chs 23–26), and a voyage to Rome (chs 27–28).<\/p>\n<p>Another way of getting at the structure and content of Acts is thematic. It has its starting point in Jesus’ statement, “You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the ends of the earth” (1:8). Acts can be seen as the story of the fulfillment of that “Great Commission,” unfolding essentially in three stages: (1) witness to Judaism, focused in Jerusalem but also expanding into surrounding Judea and north into Galilee (chs 1–7); (2) witness to Samaria through Philip, Peter, and John (8:1–9:31); (3) witness to the gentile world, first haltingly through Peter (9:32–12:25), and then decisively through Paul (chs 13–28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Luke (Person); Paul, The Apostle; Simon Peter; Theophilus #1; Chronology of the Bible (New Testament).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, Book of the NT book presenting the history of the early church and written as a sequel to the Gospel of Luke. In the arrangement of the NT books, Acts comes after the four Gospels and before the Epistles. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, Destination • Background and Content • Purpose Author The book of Acts does not state clearly who its writer is, but the general consensus is that Luke was its author. Early church tradition from the second century states that Acts (as w...","summary_en":"ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, Book of the NT book presenting the history of the early church and written as a sequel to the Gospel of Luke. In the arrangement of the NT books, Acts comes after the four Gospels and before the Epistles. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, Destination • Background and Content • Purpose Author The book of Acts does not state clearly who its writer is, but the general consensus is that Luke was its author. Early church tradition from the second century states that Acts (as w...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":3675,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>BAPTISM<\/h3>\n<p>Term generally meaning “to dip” or “immerse,” but representing a group of words employed to signify a religious rite for ritual cleansing. In the NT it became the rite of initiation into the Christian community, and it was interpreted theologically as a dying and rising with Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Baptism of John<\/p>\n<p>• The Baptism of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ Resurrection Command to Baptize<\/p>\n<p>• Baptism in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• The Theology of Baptism in Paul’s and Peter’s Epistles<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBaptismofJohn\">The Baptism of John<\/p>\n<p>John preached a “baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Lk 3:3). The origins of his rite are difficult to trace. Some have claimed that his baptism modeled that practiced by those at Qumran; others have urged that his baptism modeled that practiced by Jews when initiating proselytes to Judaism. The members of the Qumran community viewed themselves as the covenant community of the last days and so dwelt in the desert, living an ascetic life and immersing themselves daily in acts of ceremonial cleansing. At the same time they taught that internal repentance must accompany the external act (1 QS 2:3). Its sacramental nature is seen in the fact that only a full member of the community could practice it, and then only after two probationary years (1 QS 5:6). Converts from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of the Gentile background.<\/p>\n<p>John’s baptism both parallels and differs with these forms of baptism. The genesis of his baptism may be found in the prophetic acted-out parable, which not only symbolized God’s message but also intended to bring it about. John’s practice had several theological ramifications: (1) It was intimately connected with radical repentance, not only of the Gentile but astoundingly (to his contemporaries) also of the Jew. (2) It was eschatological at the core, preparing for the Messiah, who would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11), and therefore looked to the final separation between God’s people and the wicked at the eschaton (i.e., “the End,” cf. Mt 3:12). (3) It symbolized moral purification and so prepared the people for the coming kingdom (Mt 3:2; Lk 3:7-14). In spite of the obvious connection between John’s ceremony and the early church, we cannot posit absolute dependence. In fact, it disappeared from Jesus’ ministry. At first, Jesus allowed his disciples to continue the rite (Jn 3:22), but later he seemingly discontinued the practice (Jn 4:1-3), probably for the following reasons: (1) John’s message was functional, while Jesus’ was personal\/ontological. (2) John’s was forward-looking, expecting the coming kingdom, while Jesus’ was backward-looking, celebrating that event. (3) John’s was an interim practice, while Jesus’ was sacramental. Jesus’ ministry fulfilled John’s, so he severed himself from the latter’s modus operandi.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBaptismofJesus\">The Baptism of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>This event has its genesis in a complex interplay of motives, divine and human, within the messianic consciousness of Jesus (see Mk 1:9-11 and parallels). For John it was Jesus’ stamp of approval upon his message and ministry. Jesus was in continuity with John’s kingdom proclamation. For Jesus, it was also an anointing that signified the inauguration of his messianic ministry. As seen in God’s “heavenly voice” of Mark 1:11 and parallels, this has two aspects: (1) The voice alludes to Psalm 2:7, establishing Jesus’ unique sonship. (2) It alludes to Isaiah 42:1, establishing him as the messianic “servant of Yahweh.” (This is discussed at greater length in the article below.)<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusResurrectionCommandtoBaptize\">Jesus’ Resurrection Command to Baptize<\/p>\n<p>Here we find the true basis of the church’s practice (Mt 28:19). As already stated, the disciples stopped employing it, so it is here that we see the institution reconstituted as an ordinance based on the death and resurrection of Christ. It was no longer a forward-looking phenomenon but had now become a realized activity centering on the gospel message, certified by the risen Christ who is exalted to universal lordship. It also is an essential aspect of the discipling activity, as seen in the use of the participle “baptizing” after the main verb “make disciples.” Finally we might note that the act signifies the entrance of the believer “into” union with (literally “into the name of”) the triune Godhead.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BaptismintheEarlyChurch\">Baptism in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>Acts 2:38 shows that baptism was a sacral institution from the very beginning. This takes it back to the earliest days of the church. In the primitive church it was an important part of the salvation process (Acts 2:38, “repent and be baptized”) and was accomplished via confession and prayer “in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5). Probably there was a question-and-answer period in which the believer confessed his faith and dedicated himself to Christ. The result was reception into and identification with the messianic community of the new covenant, signifying both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (Lk 3:16; Acts 2:38, 41; 9:17; 10:47-48; 11:16-17; 19:5-7). <em>See<\/em> Baptism of Fire; Baptism of Jesus; Baptism of the Spirit.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTheologyofBaptisminPaulsandPetersEpistles\">The Theology of Baptism in Paul’s and Peter’s Epistles<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s basic statement is found in Galatians 3:27, “baptized into Christ.” The rite of baptism is christological at the heart, signifying union with Christ. This is clarified further by Romans 6:3-8, which equates baptism with dying and rising (cf. Col 2:12-13). At the same time baptism is related to the Spirit; 1 Corinthians 12:13 connects “baptism by the one Spirit” with being “given that same Spirit.” Many see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” by the Spirit (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13; 4:30). This leads us to the eschatological dimension of baptism. In its relation to the present work of Christ and the Spirit, it externalizes the outpouring of salvation in the age of fulfillment, because it is the initiatory rite signifying the believer’s entrance into the blessings of the new age (Ti 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>There is also a definite link between baptism and the OT covenants. The major connection is with the Abrahamic, especially with the circumcision that characterized it. Paul in Colossians 2:11-12 combines Jewish circumcision with Christian baptism as pictures of the redemptive work of Christ. The debate today centers on the degree of continuity between them—does baptism perform the same function in the New Covenant, i.e., forensic and imputative? Whatever the theological ramifications, Paul at least cannot be made to say this. Rather, he borrows here the Judeo-Christian imagery of the “circumcision of the heart” (Dt 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3). Christians experience the fulfillment of that which circumcision merely prefigured, a spiritual, totally efficacious reality.<\/p>\n<p>Baptism is also related to the Noahic covenant in 1 Peter 3:19-21. There Noah’s deliverance through the waters is considered a picture of the effects of baptism. The debate centers on the meaning of “baptism now saves you.” The answer is connected with the thrust of the ensuing clarification, “an appeal to God for a clear conscience” (<span>rsv<\/span>, lit. “of a good conscience”). While the developed dialogue between the sacramental and baptist views is considered below, we will simply comment here that the interpretation “appeal <em>by<\/em> a good conscience” best fits the emphatic position of this phrase and the picture in this verse of a pledging convert. Baptism is the seal of the salvation covenant, which itself has been accomplished beforehand by the act of Christ and the faith decision of the individual.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BAPTISM<\/h3>\n<p>Term generally meaning “to dip” or “immerse,” but representing a group of words employed to signify a religious rite for ritual cleansing. In the NT it became the rite of initiation into the Christian community, and it was interpreted theologically as a dying and rising with Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Baptism of John<\/p>\n<p>• The Baptism of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ Resurrection Command to Baptize<\/p>\n<p>• Baptism in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• The Theology of Baptism in Paul’s and Peter’s Epistles<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBaptismofJohn\">The Baptism of John<\/p>\n<p>John preached a “baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Lk 3:3). The origins of his rite are difficult to trace. Some have claimed that his baptism modeled that practiced by those at Qumran; others have urged that his baptism modeled that practiced by Jews when initiating proselytes to Judaism. The members of the Qumran community viewed themselves as the covenant community of the last days and so dwelt in the desert, living an ascetic life and immersing themselves daily in acts of ceremonial cleansing. At the same time they taught that internal repentance must accompany the external act (1 QS 2:3). Its sacramental nature is seen in the fact that only a full member of the community could practice it, and then only after two probationary years (1 QS 5:6). Converts from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of the Gentile background.<\/p>\n<p>John’s baptism both parallels and differs with these forms of baptism. The genesis of his baptism may be found in the prophetic acted-out parable, which not only symbolized God’s message but also intended to bring it about. John’s practice had several theological ramifications: (1) It was intimately connected with radical repentance, not only of the Gentile but astoundingly (to his contemporaries) also of the Jew. (2) It was eschatological at the core, preparing for the Messiah, who would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11), and therefore looked to the final separation between God’s people and the wicked at the eschaton (i.e., “the End,” cf. Mt 3:12). (3) It symbolized moral purification and so prepared the people for the coming kingdom (Mt 3:2; Lk 3:7-14). In spite of the obvious connection between John’s ceremony and the early church, we cannot posit absolute dependence. In fact, it disappeared from Jesus’ ministry. At first, Jesus allowed his disciples to continue the rite (Jn 3:22), but later he seemingly discontinued the practice (Jn 4:1-3), probably for the following reasons: (1) John’s message was functional, while Jesus’ was personal\/ontological. (2) John’s was forward-looking, expecting the coming kingdom, while Jesus’ was backward-looking, celebrating that event. (3) John’s was an interim practice, while Jesus’ was sacramental. Jesus’ ministry fulfilled John’s, so he severed himself from the latter’s modus operandi.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBaptismofJesus\">The Baptism of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>This event has its genesis in a complex interplay of motives, divine and human, within the messianic consciousness of Jesus (see Mk 1:9-11 and parallels). For John it was Jesus’ stamp of approval upon his message and ministry. Jesus was in continuity with John’s kingdom proclamation. For Jesus, it was also an anointing that signified the inauguration of his messianic ministry. As seen in God’s “heavenly voice” of Mark 1:11 and parallels, this has two aspects: (1) The voice alludes to Psalm 2:7, establishing Jesus’ unique sonship. (2) It alludes to Isaiah 42:1, establishing him as the messianic “servant of Yahweh.” (This is discussed at greater length in the article below.)<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusResurrectionCommandtoBaptize\">Jesus’ Resurrection Command to Baptize<\/p>\n<p>Here we find the true basis of the church’s practice (Mt 28:19). As already stated, the disciples stopped employing it, so it is here that we see the institution reconstituted as an ordinance based on the death and resurrection of Christ. It was no longer a forward-looking phenomenon but had now become a realized activity centering on the gospel message, certified by the risen Christ who is exalted to universal lordship. It also is an essential aspect of the discipling activity, as seen in the use of the participle “baptizing” after the main verb “make disciples.” Finally we might note that the act signifies the entrance of the believer “into” union with (literally “into the name of”) the triune Godhead.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BaptismintheEarlyChurch\">Baptism in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>Acts 2:38 shows that baptism was a sacral institution from the very beginning. This takes it back to the earliest days of the church. In the primitive church it was an important part of the salvation process (Acts 2:38, “repent and be baptized”) and was accomplished via confession and prayer “in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5). Probably there was a question-and-answer period in which the believer confessed his faith and dedicated himself to Christ. The result was reception into and identification with the messianic community of the new covenant, signifying both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (Lk 3:16; Acts 2:38, 41; 9:17; 10:47-48; 11:16-17; 19:5-7). <em>See<\/em> Baptism of Fire; Baptism of Jesus; Baptism of the Spirit.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTheologyofBaptisminPaulsandPetersEpistles\">The Theology of Baptism in Paul’s and Peter’s Epistles<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s basic statement is found in Galatians 3:27, “baptized into Christ.” The rite of baptism is christological at the heart, signifying union with Christ. This is clarified further by Romans 6:3-8, which equates baptism with dying and rising (cf. Col 2:12-13). At the same time baptism is related to the Spirit; 1 Corinthians 12:13 connects “baptism by the one Spirit” with being “given that same Spirit.” Many see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” by the Spirit (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13; 4:30). This leads us to the eschatological dimension of baptism. In its relation to the present work of Christ and the Spirit, it externalizes the outpouring of salvation in the age of fulfillment, because it is the initiatory rite signifying the believer’s entrance into the blessings of the new age (Ti 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>There is also a definite link between baptism and the OT covenants. The major connection is with the Abrahamic, especially with the circumcision that characterized it. Paul in Colossians 2:11-12 combines Jewish circumcision with Christian baptism as pictures of the redemptive work of Christ. The debate today centers on the degree of continuity between them—does baptism perform the same function in the New Covenant, i.e., forensic and imputative? Whatever the theological ramifications, Paul at least cannot be made to say this. Rather, he borrows here the Judeo-Christian imagery of the “circumcision of the heart” (Dt 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3). Christians experience the fulfillment of that which circumcision merely prefigured, a spiritual, totally efficacious reality.<\/p>\n<p>Baptism is also related to the Noahic covenant in 1 Peter 3:19-21. There Noah’s deliverance through the waters is considered a picture of the effects of baptism. The debate centers on the meaning of “baptism now saves you.” The answer is connected with the thrust of the ensuing clarification, “an appeal to God for a clear conscience” (<span>rsv<\/span>, lit. “of a good conscience”). While the developed dialogue between the sacramental and baptist views is considered below, we will simply comment here that the interpretation “appeal <em>by<\/em> a good conscience” best fits the emphatic position of this phrase and the picture in this verse of a pledging convert. Baptism is the seal of the salvation covenant, which itself has been accomplished beforehand by the act of Christ and the faith decision of the individual.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BAPTISM Term generally meaning “to dip” or “immerse,” but representing a group of words employed to signify a religious rite for ritual cleansing. In the NT it became the rite of initiation into the Christian community, and it was interpreted theologically as a dying and rising with Christ. Preview • The Baptism of John • The Baptism of Jesus • Jesus’ Resurrection Command to Baptize • Baptism in the Early Church • The Theology of Baptism in Paul’s and Peter’s Epistles The Baptism of John John...","summary_en":"BAPTISM Term generally meaning “to dip” or “immerse,” but representing a group of words employed to signify a religious rite for ritual cleansing. In the NT it became the rite of initiation into the Christian community, and it was interpreted theologically as a dying and rising with Christ. Preview • The Baptism of John • The Baptism of Jesus • Jesus’ Resurrection Command to Baptize • Baptism in the Early Church • The Theology of Baptism in Paul’s and Peter’s Epistles The Baptism of John John...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20207,"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":56363,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22-36<\/strong> John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22-36<\/strong> John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22-36 John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.","summary_en":"3:22-36 John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56364,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing:<\/em> See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing:<\/em> See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22 Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing: See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.","summary_en":"3:22 Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing: See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83989,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22-36<\/strong> John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22-36<\/strong> John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22-36 John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.","summary_en":"3:22-36 John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83990,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing:<\/em> See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing:<\/em> See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22 Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing: See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.","summary_en":"3:22 Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing: See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111615,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22-36<\/strong> John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22-36<\/strong> John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22-36 John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.","summary_en":"3:22-36 John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111616,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing:<\/em> See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing:<\/em> See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22 Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing: See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.","summary_en":"3:22 Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing: See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139241,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22-36<\/strong> John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22-36<\/strong> John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22-36 John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.","summary_en":"3:22-36 John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the one who is truly from above (3:31); this requires John’s followers to shift their allegiance to Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139242,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing:<\/em> See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing:<\/em> See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22 Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing: See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.","summary_en":"3:22 Jesus spent some time . . . baptizing: See 4:2, which clarifies that Jesus’ disciples did the baptizing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66231,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93857,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121483,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149109,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":42404,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70030,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97656,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125282,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":714,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Aenon","title_en":"Aenon","content_ro":"<h3>AENON<\/h3>\n<p>Small town near the Jordan River. Scholars think Aenon may have been about 30 miles (48 kilometers) north of the Dead Sea. The Bible’s one reference to the town merely states that John the Baptist baptized there (Jn 3:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AENON<\/h3>\n<p>Small town near the Jordan River. Scholars think Aenon may have been about 30 miles (48 kilometers) north of the Dead Sea. The Bible’s one reference to the town merely states that John the Baptist baptized there (Jn 3:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"AENON Small town near the Jordan River. Scholars think Aenon may have been about 30 miles (48 kilometers) north of the Dead Sea. The Bible’s one reference to the town merely states that John the Baptist baptized there (Jn 3:23).","summary_en":"AENON Small town near the Jordan River. Scholars think Aenon may have been about 30 miles (48 kilometers) north of the Dead Sea. The Bible’s one reference to the town merely states that John the Baptist baptized there (Jn 3:23).","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20361,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33553,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Salim","title_en":"Salim","content_ro":"<h3>SALIM<\/h3>\n<p>Location near Aenon on the west side of the Jordan River. Aenon was known for its many springs and was used by John as a place for baptism (Jn 3:23). Its location is not certain. Some scholars agree with Eusebius (an early church father) that its location was about seven miles (11.3 kilometers) south of Scythopolis (Beth-shan) in the Decapolis region. Others suggest it was the Salim east of Nablus near Shechem in Samaria, or perhaps the Wadi Saleim, six miles (9.7 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SALIM<\/h3>\n<p>Location near Aenon on the west side of the Jordan River. Aenon was known for its many springs and was used by John as a place for baptism (Jn 3:23). Its location is not certain. Some scholars agree with Eusebius (an early church father) that its location was about seven miles (11.3 kilometers) south of Scythopolis (Beth-shan) in the Decapolis region. Others suggest it was the Salim east of Nablus near Shechem in Samaria, or perhaps the Wadi Saleim, six miles (9.7 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SALIM Location near Aenon on the west side of the Jordan River. Aenon was known for its many springs and was used by John as a place for baptism (Jn 3:23). Its location is not certain. Some scholars agree with Eusebius (an early church father) that its location was about seven miles (11.3 kilometers) south of Scythopolis (Beth-shan) in the Decapolis region. Others suggest it was the Salim east of Nablus near Shechem in Samaria, or perhaps the Wadi Saleim, six miles (9.7 kilometers) northeast ...","summary_en":"SALIM Location near Aenon on the west side of the Jordan River. Aenon was known for its many springs and was used by John as a place for baptism (Jn 3:23). Its location is not certain. Some scholars agree with Eusebius (an early church father) that its location was about seven miles (11.3 kilometers) south of Scythopolis (Beth-shan) in the Decapolis region. Others suggest it was the Salim east of Nablus near Shechem in Samaria, or perhaps the Wadi Saleim, six miles (9.7 kilometers) northeast ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":56365,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:24<\/strong> <em>Before John was thrown into prison<\/em> (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:24<\/strong> <em>Before John was thrown into prison<\/em> (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:24 Before John was thrown into prison (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).","summary_en":"3:24 Before John was thrown into prison (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83991,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:24<\/strong> <em>Before John was thrown into prison<\/em> (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:24<\/strong> <em>Before John was thrown into prison<\/em> (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:24 Before John was thrown into prison (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).","summary_en":"3:24 Before John was thrown into prison (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111617,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:24<\/strong> <em>Before John was thrown into prison<\/em> (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:24<\/strong> <em>Before John was thrown into prison<\/em> (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:24 Before John was thrown into prison (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).","summary_en":"3:24 Before John was thrown into prison (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139243,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:24<\/strong> <em>Before John was thrown into prison<\/em> (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:24<\/strong> <em>Before John was thrown into prison<\/em> (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:24 Before John was thrown into prison (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).","summary_en":"3:24 Before John was thrown into prison (see Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:19-20), he and Jesus worked in close proximity at the Jordan River. Once John was arrested, Jesus moved north into Galilee (Mark 1:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":56366,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:26","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:26<\/strong> <em>everybody is going to him:<\/em> Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:26<\/strong> <em>everybody is going to him:<\/em> Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:26 everybody is going to him: Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.","summary_en":"3:26 everybody is going to him: Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83992,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:26","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:26<\/strong> <em>everybody is going to him:<\/em> Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:26<\/strong> <em>everybody is going to him:<\/em> Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:26 everybody is going to him: Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.","summary_en":"3:26 everybody is going to him: Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111618,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:26","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:26<\/strong> <em>everybody is going to him:<\/em> Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:26<\/strong> <em>everybody is going to him:<\/em> Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:26 everybody is going to him: Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.","summary_en":"3:26 everybody is going to him: Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139244,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:26","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:26<\/strong> <em>everybody is going to him:<\/em> Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:26<\/strong> <em>everybody is going to him:<\/em> Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:26 everybody is going to him: Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.","summary_en":"3:26 everybody is going to him: Jesus’ popularity made some of John’s followers envious.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66232,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93858,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121484,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149110,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":56367,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:27-35<\/strong> John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:27-35<\/strong> John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:27-35 John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).","summary_en":"3:27-35 John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83993,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:27-35<\/strong> John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:27-35<\/strong> John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:27-35 John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).","summary_en":"3:27-35 John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111619,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:27-35<\/strong> John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:27-35<\/strong> John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:27-35 John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).","summary_en":"3:27-35 John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139245,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:27-35<\/strong> John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:27-35<\/strong> John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:27-35 John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).","summary_en":"3:27-35 John the Baptist’s speech was inspired by two issues: (1) Some had questioned the legitimacy of his baptism (see 1:26), and (2) his disciples were concerned that people were beginning to follow Jesus instead of John (3:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":20378,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":5701,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Bride","title_en":"of Christ*, Bride","content_ro":"<h3>BRIDE OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>One of the NT metaphors for the church. In it Christ is pictured as a husband, and the church as his bride.<\/p>\n<p>Addressing the church at Corinth, the apostle Paul referred to himself as the one who gave the church to Christ, presenting her as a pure bride to her one husband (2 Cor 11:2-3). In ancient Near Eastern culture the father gave his daughter in marriage to the bridegroom, assuring him of her purity. To Paul, understanding himself as the church’s spiritual father (1 Cor 4:15), the thought of the church as his daughter sprang readily to mind. To be Christ’s pure bride requires the church to have pure and simple devotion. Like a concerned father, Paul was worried that the young bride (the church) might commit adultery by her willingness to accept “another Jesus,” “another Spirit,” or “a different gospel” (2 Cor 11:4). As between marriage partners, the relation between the church and Christ is governed by a covenant of mutual faithfulness. Disloyalty shatters the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The OT furnished Paul a rich background for that image of the church. God’s covenant with Israel was commonly pictured as a marriage pledge, with Israel as God’s bride. Through the prophet Jeremiah, the Lord said to Israel: “I remember the devotion of your youth, your love as a bride” (Jer 2:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). He went on to lament the fact that Israel had been faithless; by going after other gods, she had actually prostituted herself and become an adulteress (Jer 3:6-9, 20).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of Israel’s desertion of her lover (God) was explicitly treated in Ezekiel 16 and in Hosea. The terms “harlotry” and “whoredom” were used to connote disloyalty to Yahweh and allegiance to other gods. Thus, adultery and idolatry became synonymous. Through his own struggles with a faithless wife, the prophet Hosea experienced God’s agony over his bride Israel and his longing for her to return. Hosea was given a vision of a future day in which God would betroth his people to him forever in steadfast love and faithfulness (Hos 2:19-20). That vision may have enabled Paul to transfer the image of Israel as God’s bride to the church as the bride of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 5:22-33, the relationship between Christ and his church is compared to the relationship between a husband and wife. The image is taken from the common understanding of the husband-wife relationship in that part of the world. The church’s submission to Christ is compared with the wife’s submission to the husband, but the stress of the passage is on the role of the husband: he is to love her as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her. Christ relates to the whole church on the basis of self-sacrificial love. Just as a husband is joined to his wife, with a mutual interdependence so intimate that they become one, so Christ and his church become one body. As the man’s love for his wife intends her wholeness, so Christ’s love of the church intends her completeness.<\/p>\n<p>A variation on the theme is found in John the Baptist’s testimony to Jesus (Jn 3:29). John saw himself as “the Bridegroom’s friend” who, according to Jewish custom, takes care of the wedding arrangements. The Messiah is identified with the bridegroom to whom the bride (his messianic community) belongs and who comes to claim that bride.<\/p>\n<p>In Revelation 19 and 21 the metaphor of the church as the Messiah’s bride is further developed. The vision in Revelation 19:7-8 announces the marriage of the Lamb (Christ) to the bride (church). In Revelation 21 the vision depicts the new Jerusalem coming down from heaven, “prepared as a bride adorned for her husband” (v 2). Then the seer is invited to behold “the Bride, the wife of the Lamb” (v 9) and to see the Holy City “coming down out of heaven from God” (v 10). The new Jerusalem is identified as the people of God, the bride of Christ, among whom and with whom God will be present forever.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Church; Jerusalem, New.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BRIDE OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>One of the NT metaphors for the church. In it Christ is pictured as a husband, and the church as his bride.<\/p>\n<p>Addressing the church at Corinth, the apostle Paul referred to himself as the one who gave the church to Christ, presenting her as a pure bride to her one husband (2 Cor 11:2-3). In ancient Near Eastern culture the father gave his daughter in marriage to the bridegroom, assuring him of her purity. To Paul, understanding himself as the church’s spiritual father (1 Cor 4:15), the thought of the church as his daughter sprang readily to mind. To be Christ’s pure bride requires the church to have pure and simple devotion. Like a concerned father, Paul was worried that the young bride (the church) might commit adultery by her willingness to accept “another Jesus,” “another Spirit,” or “a different gospel” (2 Cor 11:4). As between marriage partners, the relation between the church and Christ is governed by a covenant of mutual faithfulness. Disloyalty shatters the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The OT furnished Paul a rich background for that image of the church. God’s covenant with Israel was commonly pictured as a marriage pledge, with Israel as God’s bride. Through the prophet Jeremiah, the Lord said to Israel: “I remember the devotion of your youth, your love as a bride” (Jer 2:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). He went on to lament the fact that Israel had been faithless; by going after other gods, she had actually prostituted herself and become an adulteress (Jer 3:6-9, 20).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of Israel’s desertion of her lover (God) was explicitly treated in Ezekiel 16 and in Hosea. The terms “harlotry” and “whoredom” were used to connote disloyalty to Yahweh and allegiance to other gods. Thus, adultery and idolatry became synonymous. Through his own struggles with a faithless wife, the prophet Hosea experienced God’s agony over his bride Israel and his longing for her to return. Hosea was given a vision of a future day in which God would betroth his people to him forever in steadfast love and faithfulness (Hos 2:19-20). That vision may have enabled Paul to transfer the image of Israel as God’s bride to the church as the bride of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 5:22-33, the relationship between Christ and his church is compared to the relationship between a husband and wife. The image is taken from the common understanding of the husband-wife relationship in that part of the world. The church’s submission to Christ is compared with the wife’s submission to the husband, but the stress of the passage is on the role of the husband: he is to love her as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her. Christ relates to the whole church on the basis of self-sacrificial love. Just as a husband is joined to his wife, with a mutual interdependence so intimate that they become one, so Christ and his church become one body. As the man’s love for his wife intends her wholeness, so Christ’s love of the church intends her completeness.<\/p>\n<p>A variation on the theme is found in John the Baptist’s testimony to Jesus (Jn 3:29). John saw himself as “the Bridegroom’s friend” who, according to Jewish custom, takes care of the wedding arrangements. The Messiah is identified with the bridegroom to whom the bride (his messianic community) belongs and who comes to claim that bride.<\/p>\n<p>In Revelation 19 and 21 the metaphor of the church as the Messiah’s bride is further developed. The vision in Revelation 19:7-8 announces the marriage of the Lamb (Christ) to the bride (church). In Revelation 21 the vision depicts the new Jerusalem coming down from heaven, “prepared as a bride adorned for her husband” (v 2). Then the seer is invited to behold “the Bride, the wife of the Lamb” (v 9) and to see the Holy City “coming down out of heaven from God” (v 10). The new Jerusalem is identified as the people of God, the bride of Christ, among whom and with whom God will be present forever.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Church; Jerusalem, New.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BRIDE OF CHRIST* One of the NT metaphors for the church. In it Christ is pictured as a husband, and the church as his bride. Addressing the church at Corinth, the apostle Paul referred to himself as the one who gave the church to Christ, presenting her as a pure bride to her one husband (2 Cor 11:2-3). In ancient Near Eastern culture the father gave his daughter in marriage to the bridegroom, assuring him of her purity. To Paul, understanding himself as the church’s spiritual father (1 Cor 4:...","summary_en":"BRIDE OF CHRIST* One of the NT metaphors for the church. In it Christ is pictured as a husband, and the church as his bride. Addressing the church at Corinth, the apostle Paul referred to himself as the one who gave the church to Christ, presenting her as a pure bride to her one husband (2 Cor 11:2-3). In ancient Near Eastern culture the father gave his daughter in marriage to the bridegroom, assuring him of her purity. To Paul, understanding himself as the church’s spiritual father (1 Cor 4:...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24540,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Marriage Customs Marriage","title_en":"Marriage Customs Marriage","content_ro":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","summary_en":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56368,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:29","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:29<\/strong> John the Baptist saw Jesus as the <em>bridegroom<\/em> and himself as <em>the bridegroom’s friend<\/em>. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:29<\/strong> John the Baptist saw Jesus as the <em>bridegroom<\/em> and himself as <em>the bridegroom’s friend<\/em>. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:29 John the Baptist saw Jesus as the bridegroom and himself as the bridegroom’s friend. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.","summary_en":"3:29 John the Baptist saw Jesus as the bridegroom and himself as the bridegroom’s friend. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83994,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:29","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:29<\/strong> John the Baptist saw Jesus as the <em>bridegroom<\/em> and himself as <em>the bridegroom’s friend<\/em>. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:29<\/strong> John the Baptist saw Jesus as the <em>bridegroom<\/em> and himself as <em>the bridegroom’s friend<\/em>. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:29 John the Baptist saw Jesus as the bridegroom and himself as the bridegroom’s friend. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.","summary_en":"3:29 John the Baptist saw Jesus as the bridegroom and himself as the bridegroom’s friend. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111620,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:29","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:29<\/strong> John the Baptist saw Jesus as the <em>bridegroom<\/em> and himself as <em>the bridegroom’s friend<\/em>. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:29<\/strong> John the Baptist saw Jesus as the <em>bridegroom<\/em> and himself as <em>the bridegroom’s friend<\/em>. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:29 John the Baptist saw Jesus as the bridegroom and himself as the bridegroom’s friend. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.","summary_en":"3:29 John the Baptist saw Jesus as the bridegroom and himself as the bridegroom’s friend. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139246,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:29","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:29<\/strong> John the Baptist saw Jesus as the <em>bridegroom<\/em> and himself as <em>the bridegroom’s friend<\/em>. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:29<\/strong> John the Baptist saw Jesus as the <em>bridegroom<\/em> and himself as <em>the bridegroom’s friend<\/em>. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:29 John the Baptist saw Jesus as the bridegroom and himself as the bridegroom’s friend. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.","summary_en":"3:29 John the Baptist saw Jesus as the bridegroom and himself as the bridegroom’s friend. His response deflected glory from himself and elevated Jesus’ stature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":56369,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:31","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:31<\/strong> Jesus had <em>come from above<\/em><em>,<\/em> so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:31<\/strong> Jesus had <em>come from above<\/em><em>,<\/em> so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:31 Jesus had come from above, so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).","summary_en":"3:31 Jesus had come from above, so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83995,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:31","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:31<\/strong> Jesus had <em>come from above<\/em><em>,<\/em> so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:31<\/strong> Jesus had <em>come from above<\/em><em>,<\/em> so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:31 Jesus had come from above, so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).","summary_en":"3:31 Jesus had come from above, so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111621,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:31","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:31<\/strong> Jesus had <em>come from above<\/em><em>,<\/em> so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:31<\/strong> Jesus had <em>come from above<\/em><em>,<\/em> so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:31 Jesus had come from above, so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).","summary_en":"3:31 Jesus had come from above, so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139247,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:31","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:31<\/strong> Jesus had <em>come from above<\/em><em>,<\/em> so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:31<\/strong> Jesus had <em>come from above<\/em><em>,<\/em> so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:31 Jesus had come from above, so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).","summary_en":"3:31 Jesus had come from above, so he was uniquely able to reveal the Father (1:18; 3:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"33":[{"id":34232,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Seal","title_en":"Seal","content_ro":"<h3>SEAL<\/h3>\n<p>Small engraved object widely used in the ancient Near East to produce an image in soft clay.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>The exact origin of seals cannot be determined. The first seal probably developed from the amulet, whose purpose was to give protection to its wearer or to ward off evil. At one time a seal was believed to have some kind of magical protective power that would bring a curse or harm to the unauthorized person who dared to break it to obtain the contents it protected. Primitive seals were little more than tiny clay spools scratched with twigs to produce simple designs or figures. Glyptic art (the technical name for engraving or carving of seals on gems) flourished in the ancient Near East from the fourth millennium <span>BC<\/span> to the end of the Persian period in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofSeals\">Types of Seals<\/p>\n<h5>Stamp Seals<\/h5>\n<p>Seals were produced in many shapes and sizes, the earliest being the stamp seal, a flat engraved gem or bead that produced a copy of itself when pressed against soft clay. It was superseded about 3000 <span>BC<\/span> in Mesopotamia by the cylinder seal and began to be used again only at the end of the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>; by Hellenistic times it had replaced the cylinder seal altogether.<\/p>\n<h5>Cylinder Seals<\/h5>\n<p>The cylinder seal first appeared in Mesopotamia before 3000 <span>BC<\/span> and became the most widely used kind of seal until the middle of the first millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Its use in Egypt is evidence of early Mesopotamian cultural influence upon Egypt; however, it was soon replaced there by the scarab (beetle-shaped) seal, which was better adapted for sealing papyrus documents. Symbols or designs were carved on the outside of the cylinder, which left their imprint when the seal was rolled over the wet clay. Some of the earliest symbols used were geometric designs or representations of some magical symbol. Later seals depicted everything from mythology (deities seated conversing with each other, receiving worshipers in audience, riding in a boat or chariot, or fighting an enemy) to scenes from everyday life (hunting, marrying, banqueting, feeding animals, fighting wild beasts, offering sacrifices to the deity, warring, leading prisoners away) and representations of animals, flowers, and birds. Writing (e.g., the owner’s name or a declaration of loyalty to a god or king) began to appear on seals in the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Because of the great number and variety of seals that have been found, they are invaluable for what they reveal about ancient peoples—how they dressed, their hairstyles, furniture, utensils, and religious beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>Seals were so widely used and have been unearthed in such quantity in the ancient Near East that they can be dated within a century or two of their origin, though sometimes it is difficult to determine the exact period or country of origin. Herodotus observed that every Babylonian gentleman “carries a seal and a walking stick” (Book I, 195). The seal was suspended by a cord about the neck or the wrist or attached to some part of the owner’s clothing (cf. Gn 38:18; 41:42; Sg 8:6; Jer 22:24). Graves have been found with cylinders tied to the wrists of the skeletons.<\/p>\n<p>Another type of seal was the jar handle seal. Cloth was placed over the neck of a bottle, soft clay was smeared on top of the binding cord, and then the seal was pressed into the wet clay. The unbroken seal showed that the merchandise had not been opened before delivery. In Judea the seal was impressed on jar handles as evidence of ownership. Some jar handle stamps were probably trademarks of pottery factories; some bear private names (perhaps the owner of the factory). The so-called royal jar handle stamps contain either a four-winged or two-winged symbol and a short inscription consisting of two lines. The line above reads “belonging to the king,” and the lower line contains the name of a city, probably where the jar was made.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Uses\">Uses<\/p>\n<h5>Functional Uses<\/h5>\n<p>Since their first creation as amulets, seals continued to serve as signals of protection. An unbroken seal proved that the contents had not been tampered with, whether on a document, a granary door, or a wine jar. The lions’ den into which Daniel was cast was sealed with the king’s signet and those of his nobles (Dn 6:17). Jesus’ tomb was secured by sealing the stone (Mt 27:66). The seal also served as a mark of ownership or as a trademark (e.g., placed on pottery before firing). It was also used to validate documents (letters, bills of sale, government documents, etc.). Jezebel wrote letters in her husband’s name and sealed them with his seal, thus bringing about the death of Naboth (1 Kgs 21:8-13). Jeremiah sealed a deed of purchase when he bought a kinsman’s land (Jer 32:10-14). An edict with the Persian king’s seal could not be revoked (Est 8:8).<\/p>\n<h5>Symbolic Use<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolic use of the seal is found both in nonbiblical and biblical literature. A Babylonian prayer says, “Like a seal may my sins be torn away.” The OT says, “Seal the teaching among my disciples” (Is 8:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). Zerubbabel was told he would become God’s signet ring (Hg 2:23). The earth took shape like clay pressed by a signet ring (Jb 38:14).<\/p>\n<p>The word is used symbolically in the NT to designate God’s personal ownership. For example, the Scriptures say that God’s seal is on Jesus, his Son (Jn 3:33; 6:27). This means that Jesus bears God’s personal name; Jesus is God’s personal expression. The Scriptures also say that the Holy Spirit seals the believers (2 Cor 1:22; Eph 1:13; 4:30). This means that the Spirit is God’s mark of ownership on the believers, and it means that the Spirit protects and preserves the believers throughout their lives.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Archaeology and the Bible; Inscriptions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SEAL<\/h3>\n<p>Small engraved object widely used in the ancient Near East to produce an image in soft clay.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>The exact origin of seals cannot be determined. The first seal probably developed from the amulet, whose purpose was to give protection to its wearer or to ward off evil. At one time a seal was believed to have some kind of magical protective power that would bring a curse or harm to the unauthorized person who dared to break it to obtain the contents it protected. Primitive seals were little more than tiny clay spools scratched with twigs to produce simple designs or figures. Glyptic art (the technical name for engraving or carving of seals on gems) flourished in the ancient Near East from the fourth millennium <span>BC<\/span> to the end of the Persian period in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofSeals\">Types of Seals<\/p>\n<h5>Stamp Seals<\/h5>\n<p>Seals were produced in many shapes and sizes, the earliest being the stamp seal, a flat engraved gem or bead that produced a copy of itself when pressed against soft clay. It was superseded about 3000 <span>BC<\/span> in Mesopotamia by the cylinder seal and began to be used again only at the end of the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>; by Hellenistic times it had replaced the cylinder seal altogether.<\/p>\n<h5>Cylinder Seals<\/h5>\n<p>The cylinder seal first appeared in Mesopotamia before 3000 <span>BC<\/span> and became the most widely used kind of seal until the middle of the first millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Its use in Egypt is evidence of early Mesopotamian cultural influence upon Egypt; however, it was soon replaced there by the scarab (beetle-shaped) seal, which was better adapted for sealing papyrus documents. Symbols or designs were carved on the outside of the cylinder, which left their imprint when the seal was rolled over the wet clay. Some of the earliest symbols used were geometric designs or representations of some magical symbol. Later seals depicted everything from mythology (deities seated conversing with each other, receiving worshipers in audience, riding in a boat or chariot, or fighting an enemy) to scenes from everyday life (hunting, marrying, banqueting, feeding animals, fighting wild beasts, offering sacrifices to the deity, warring, leading prisoners away) and representations of animals, flowers, and birds. Writing (e.g., the owner’s name or a declaration of loyalty to a god or king) began to appear on seals in the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Because of the great number and variety of seals that have been found, they are invaluable for what they reveal about ancient peoples—how they dressed, their hairstyles, furniture, utensils, and religious beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>Seals were so widely used and have been unearthed in such quantity in the ancient Near East that they can be dated within a century or two of their origin, though sometimes it is difficult to determine the exact period or country of origin. Herodotus observed that every Babylonian gentleman “carries a seal and a walking stick” (Book I, 195). The seal was suspended by a cord about the neck or the wrist or attached to some part of the owner’s clothing (cf. Gn 38:18; 41:42; Sg 8:6; Jer 22:24). Graves have been found with cylinders tied to the wrists of the skeletons.<\/p>\n<p>Another type of seal was the jar handle seal. Cloth was placed over the neck of a bottle, soft clay was smeared on top of the binding cord, and then the seal was pressed into the wet clay. The unbroken seal showed that the merchandise had not been opened before delivery. In Judea the seal was impressed on jar handles as evidence of ownership. Some jar handle stamps were probably trademarks of pottery factories; some bear private names (perhaps the owner of the factory). The so-called royal jar handle stamps contain either a four-winged or two-winged symbol and a short inscription consisting of two lines. The line above reads “belonging to the king,” and the lower line contains the name of a city, probably where the jar was made.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Uses\">Uses<\/p>\n<h5>Functional Uses<\/h5>\n<p>Since their first creation as amulets, seals continued to serve as signals of protection. An unbroken seal proved that the contents had not been tampered with, whether on a document, a granary door, or a wine jar. The lions’ den into which Daniel was cast was sealed with the king’s signet and those of his nobles (Dn 6:17). Jesus’ tomb was secured by sealing the stone (Mt 27:66). The seal also served as a mark of ownership or as a trademark (e.g., placed on pottery before firing). It was also used to validate documents (letters, bills of sale, government documents, etc.). Jezebel wrote letters in her husband’s name and sealed them with his seal, thus bringing about the death of Naboth (1 Kgs 21:8-13). Jeremiah sealed a deed of purchase when he bought a kinsman’s land (Jer 32:10-14). An edict with the Persian king’s seal could not be revoked (Est 8:8).<\/p>\n<h5>Symbolic Use<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolic use of the seal is found both in nonbiblical and biblical literature. A Babylonian prayer says, “Like a seal may my sins be torn away.” The OT says, “Seal the teaching among my disciples” (Is 8:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). Zerubbabel was told he would become God’s signet ring (Hg 2:23). The earth took shape like clay pressed by a signet ring (Jb 38:14).<\/p>\n<p>The word is used symbolically in the NT to designate God’s personal ownership. For example, the Scriptures say that God’s seal is on Jesus, his Son (Jn 3:33; 6:27). This means that Jesus bears God’s personal name; Jesus is God’s personal expression. The Scriptures also say that the Holy Spirit seals the believers (2 Cor 1:22; Eph 1:13; 4:30). This means that the Spirit is God’s mark of ownership on the believers, and it means that the Spirit protects and preserves the believers throughout their lives.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Archaeology and the Bible; Inscriptions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SEAL Small engraved object widely used in the ancient Near East to produce an image in soft clay. Origin The exact origin of seals cannot be determined. The first seal probably developed from the amulet, whose purpose was to give protection to its wearer or to ward off evil. At one time a seal was believed to have some kind of magical protective power that would bring a curse or harm to the unauthorized person who dared to break it to obtain the contents it protected. Primitive seals were lit...","summary_en":"SEAL Small engraved object widely used in the ancient Near East to produce an image in soft clay. Origin The exact origin of seals cannot be determined. The first seal probably developed from the amulet, whose purpose was to give protection to its wearer or to ward off evil. At one time a seal was believed to have some kind of magical protective power that would bring a curse or harm to the unauthorized person who dared to break it to obtain the contents it protected. Primitive seals were lit...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":36115,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Spirit of God","title_en":"Spirit of God","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56370,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:34-35<\/strong> The Father <em>gives<\/em> the Son <em>the Spirit without limit<\/em> as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:34-35<\/strong> The Father <em>gives<\/em> the Son <em>the Spirit without limit<\/em> as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:34-35 The Father gives the Son the Spirit without limit as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).","summary_en":"3:34-35 The Father gives the Son the Spirit without limit as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83996,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:34-35<\/strong> The Father <em>gives<\/em> the Son <em>the Spirit without limit<\/em> as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:34-35<\/strong> The Father <em>gives<\/em> the Son <em>the Spirit without limit<\/em> as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:34-35 The Father gives the Son the Spirit without limit as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).","summary_en":"3:34-35 The Father gives the Son the Spirit without limit as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111622,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:34-35<\/strong> The Father <em>gives<\/em> the Son <em>the Spirit without limit<\/em> as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:34-35<\/strong> The Father <em>gives<\/em> the Son <em>the Spirit without limit<\/em> as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:34-35 The Father gives the Son the Spirit without limit as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).","summary_en":"3:34-35 The Father gives the Son the Spirit without limit as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139248,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:34-35<\/strong> The Father <em>gives<\/em> the Son <em>the Spirit without limit<\/em> as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:34-35<\/strong> The Father <em>gives<\/em> the Son <em>the Spirit without limit<\/em> as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:34-35 The Father gives the Son the Spirit without limit as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).","summary_en":"3:34-35 The Father gives the Son the Spirit without limit as a sign of his profound love (3:35). It also illustrates Jesus’ divinity. John presents the one God as three persons (cp. 1 Jn 5:5-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60634,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Spirit Empowerment","title_en":"Spirit Empowerment","content_ro":"<h3>Spirit Empowerment<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord redistributed the Spirit that Moses already possessed and empowered these men for service (Num 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was empowered by the Lord’s Spirit as Moses’ successor (Num 27:18; cp. Deut 34:9). In the period of the Judges, the Spirit of the Lord came to the aid of Israel’s leaders as, for example, in the work of Othniel (Judg 3:10), Gideon (Judg 6:34), Jephthah (Judg 11:29), and Samson (Judg 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14). David had access to the strength of God’s presence, and his awareness of God’s actions—in history and in his own experience—made him a great leader (e.g., 1 Sam 16:13; 17:45; 18:12, 28). The prophets knew that their special ministry was possible because of the Spirit’s presence and power (e.g., Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Zech 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was filled with God’s Spirit and empowered for a unique ministry (see Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38), and he spoke about the Spirit’s special role in the church (Acts 1:8). The arrival of the Spirit enabled the assembled believers to speak powerfully on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4-5, 16-18; cp. Joel 2:28-29). The Spirit emboldened and empowered the church after Pentecost (Acts 4:31; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5) and remains with God’s people today. The Spirit moves as circumstances require to provide spiritual renewal and strength to God’s people, and the Spirit continues to equip God’s people for whatever tasks he calls them to do.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 11:16-30; 24:1-9; 27:18-23; Deut 34:10-12; Judg 3:9-10; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6, 19; 15:14; 1 Sam 16:13; Pss 23; 46:1; 94:16-19; 116:1-9; 121:1-8; 143:10-12; Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Joel 2:28-29; Zech 4:6; Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 1:8; 2:4, 16-18; 4:31; 10:38; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Spirit Empowerment<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord redistributed the Spirit that Moses already possessed and empowered these men for service (Num 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was empowered by the Lord’s Spirit as Moses’ successor (Num 27:18; cp. Deut 34:9). In the period of the Judges, the Spirit of the Lord came to the aid of Israel’s leaders as, for example, in the work of Othniel (Judg 3:10), Gideon (Judg 6:34), Jephthah (Judg 11:29), and Samson (Judg 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14). David had access to the strength of God’s presence, and his awareness of God’s actions—in history and in his own experience—made him a great leader (e.g., 1 Sam 16:13; 17:45; 18:12, 28). The prophets knew that their special ministry was possible because of the Spirit’s presence and power (e.g., Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Zech 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was filled with God’s Spirit and empowered for a unique ministry (see Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38), and he spoke about the Spirit’s special role in the church (Acts 1:8). The arrival of the Spirit enabled the assembled believers to speak powerfully on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4-5, 16-18; cp. Joel 2:28-29). The Spirit emboldened and empowered the church after Pentecost (Acts 4:31; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5) and remains with God’s people today. The Spirit moves as circumstances require to provide spiritual renewal and strength to God’s people, and the Spirit continues to equip God’s people for whatever tasks he calls them to do.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 11:16-30; 24:1-9; 27:18-23; Deut 34:10-12; Judg 3:9-10; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6, 19; 15:14; 1 Sam 16:13; Pss 23; 46:1; 94:16-19; 116:1-9; 121:1-8; 143:10-12; Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Joel 2:28-29; Zech 4:6; Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 1:8; 2:4, 16-18; 4:31; 10:38; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Spirit Empowerment Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord re...","summary_en":"Spirit Empowerment Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88260,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Spirit Empowerment","title_en":"Spirit Empowerment","content_ro":"<h3>Spirit Empowerment<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord redistributed the Spirit that Moses already possessed and empowered these men for service (Num 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was empowered by the Lord’s Spirit as Moses’ successor (Num 27:18; cp. Deut 34:9). In the period of the Judges, the Spirit of the Lord came to the aid of Israel’s leaders as, for example, in the work of Othniel (Judg 3:10), Gideon (Judg 6:34), Jephthah (Judg 11:29), and Samson (Judg 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14). David had access to the strength of God’s presence, and his awareness of God’s actions—in history and in his own experience—made him a great leader (e.g., 1 Sam 16:13; 17:45; 18:12, 28). The prophets knew that their special ministry was possible because of the Spirit’s presence and power (e.g., Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Zech 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was filled with God’s Spirit and empowered for a unique ministry (see Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38), and he spoke about the Spirit’s special role in the church (Acts 1:8). The arrival of the Spirit enabled the assembled believers to speak powerfully on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4-5, 16-18; cp. Joel 2:28-29). The Spirit emboldened and empowered the church after Pentecost (Acts 4:31; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5) and remains with God’s people today. The Spirit moves as circumstances require to provide spiritual renewal and strength to God’s people, and the Spirit continues to equip God’s people for whatever tasks he calls them to do.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 11:16-30; 24:1-9; 27:18-23; Deut 34:10-12; Judg 3:9-10; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6, 19; 15:14; 1 Sam 16:13; Pss 23; 46:1; 94:16-19; 116:1-9; 121:1-8; 143:10-12; Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Joel 2:28-29; Zech 4:6; Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 1:8; 2:4, 16-18; 4:31; 10:38; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Spirit Empowerment<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord redistributed the Spirit that Moses already possessed and empowered these men for service (Num 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was empowered by the Lord’s Spirit as Moses’ successor (Num 27:18; cp. Deut 34:9). In the period of the Judges, the Spirit of the Lord came to the aid of Israel’s leaders as, for example, in the work of Othniel (Judg 3:10), Gideon (Judg 6:34), Jephthah (Judg 11:29), and Samson (Judg 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14). David had access to the strength of God’s presence, and his awareness of God’s actions—in history and in his own experience—made him a great leader (e.g., 1 Sam 16:13; 17:45; 18:12, 28). The prophets knew that their special ministry was possible because of the Spirit’s presence and power (e.g., Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Zech 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was filled with God’s Spirit and empowered for a unique ministry (see Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38), and he spoke about the Spirit’s special role in the church (Acts 1:8). The arrival of the Spirit enabled the assembled believers to speak powerfully on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4-5, 16-18; cp. Joel 2:28-29). The Spirit emboldened and empowered the church after Pentecost (Acts 4:31; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5) and remains with God’s people today. The Spirit moves as circumstances require to provide spiritual renewal and strength to God’s people, and the Spirit continues to equip God’s people for whatever tasks he calls them to do.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 11:16-30; 24:1-9; 27:18-23; Deut 34:10-12; Judg 3:9-10; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6, 19; 15:14; 1 Sam 16:13; Pss 23; 46:1; 94:16-19; 116:1-9; 121:1-8; 143:10-12; Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Joel 2:28-29; Zech 4:6; Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 1:8; 2:4, 16-18; 4:31; 10:38; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Spirit Empowerment Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord re...","summary_en":"Spirit Empowerment Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115886,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Spirit Empowerment","title_en":"Spirit Empowerment","content_ro":"<h3>Spirit Empowerment<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord redistributed the Spirit that Moses already possessed and empowered these men for service (Num 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was empowered by the Lord’s Spirit as Moses’ successor (Num 27:18; cp. Deut 34:9). In the period of the Judges, the Spirit of the Lord came to the aid of Israel’s leaders as, for example, in the work of Othniel (Judg 3:10), Gideon (Judg 6:34), Jephthah (Judg 11:29), and Samson (Judg 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14). David had access to the strength of God’s presence, and his awareness of God’s actions—in history and in his own experience—made him a great leader (e.g., 1 Sam 16:13; 17:45; 18:12, 28). The prophets knew that their special ministry was possible because of the Spirit’s presence and power (e.g., Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Zech 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was filled with God’s Spirit and empowered for a unique ministry (see Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38), and he spoke about the Spirit’s special role in the church (Acts 1:8). The arrival of the Spirit enabled the assembled believers to speak powerfully on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4-5, 16-18; cp. Joel 2:28-29). The Spirit emboldened and empowered the church after Pentecost (Acts 4:31; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5) and remains with God’s people today. The Spirit moves as circumstances require to provide spiritual renewal and strength to God’s people, and the Spirit continues to equip God’s people for whatever tasks he calls them to do.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 11:16-30; 24:1-9; 27:18-23; Deut 34:10-12; Judg 3:9-10; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6, 19; 15:14; 1 Sam 16:13; Pss 23; 46:1; 94:16-19; 116:1-9; 121:1-8; 143:10-12; Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Joel 2:28-29; Zech 4:6; Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 1:8; 2:4, 16-18; 4:31; 10:38; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Spirit Empowerment<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord redistributed the Spirit that Moses already possessed and empowered these men for service (Num 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was empowered by the Lord’s Spirit as Moses’ successor (Num 27:18; cp. Deut 34:9). In the period of the Judges, the Spirit of the Lord came to the aid of Israel’s leaders as, for example, in the work of Othniel (Judg 3:10), Gideon (Judg 6:34), Jephthah (Judg 11:29), and Samson (Judg 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14). David had access to the strength of God’s presence, and his awareness of God’s actions—in history and in his own experience—made him a great leader (e.g., 1 Sam 16:13; 17:45; 18:12, 28). The prophets knew that their special ministry was possible because of the Spirit’s presence and power (e.g., Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Zech 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was filled with God’s Spirit and empowered for a unique ministry (see Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38), and he spoke about the Spirit’s special role in the church (Acts 1:8). The arrival of the Spirit enabled the assembled believers to speak powerfully on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4-5, 16-18; cp. Joel 2:28-29). The Spirit emboldened and empowered the church after Pentecost (Acts 4:31; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5) and remains with God’s people today. The Spirit moves as circumstances require to provide spiritual renewal and strength to God’s people, and the Spirit continues to equip God’s people for whatever tasks he calls them to do.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 11:16-30; 24:1-9; 27:18-23; Deut 34:10-12; Judg 3:9-10; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6, 19; 15:14; 1 Sam 16:13; Pss 23; 46:1; 94:16-19; 116:1-9; 121:1-8; 143:10-12; Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Joel 2:28-29; Zech 4:6; Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 1:8; 2:4, 16-18; 4:31; 10:38; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Spirit Empowerment Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord re...","summary_en":"Spirit Empowerment Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143512,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Spirit Empowerment","title_en":"Spirit Empowerment","content_ro":"<h3>Spirit Empowerment<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord redistributed the Spirit that Moses already possessed and empowered these men for service (Num 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was empowered by the Lord’s Spirit as Moses’ successor (Num 27:18; cp. Deut 34:9). In the period of the Judges, the Spirit of the Lord came to the aid of Israel’s leaders as, for example, in the work of Othniel (Judg 3:10), Gideon (Judg 6:34), Jephthah (Judg 11:29), and Samson (Judg 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14). David had access to the strength of God’s presence, and his awareness of God’s actions—in history and in his own experience—made him a great leader (e.g., 1 Sam 16:13; 17:45; 18:12, 28). The prophets knew that their special ministry was possible because of the Spirit’s presence and power (e.g., Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Zech 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was filled with God’s Spirit and empowered for a unique ministry (see Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38), and he spoke about the Spirit’s special role in the church (Acts 1:8). The arrival of the Spirit enabled the assembled believers to speak powerfully on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4-5, 16-18; cp. Joel 2:28-29). The Spirit emboldened and empowered the church after Pentecost (Acts 4:31; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5) and remains with God’s people today. The Spirit moves as circumstances require to provide spiritual renewal and strength to God’s people, and the Spirit continues to equip God’s people for whatever tasks he calls them to do.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 11:16-30; 24:1-9; 27:18-23; Deut 34:10-12; Judg 3:9-10; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6, 19; 15:14; 1 Sam 16:13; Pss 23; 46:1; 94:16-19; 116:1-9; 121:1-8; 143:10-12; Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Joel 2:28-29; Zech 4:6; Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 1:8; 2:4, 16-18; 4:31; 10:38; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Spirit Empowerment<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord redistributed the Spirit that Moses already possessed and empowered these men for service (Num 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was empowered by the Lord’s Spirit as Moses’ successor (Num 27:18; cp. Deut 34:9). In the period of the Judges, the Spirit of the Lord came to the aid of Israel’s leaders as, for example, in the work of Othniel (Judg 3:10), Gideon (Judg 6:34), Jephthah (Judg 11:29), and Samson (Judg 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14). David had access to the strength of God’s presence, and his awareness of God’s actions—in history and in his own experience—made him a great leader (e.g., 1 Sam 16:13; 17:45; 18:12, 28). The prophets knew that their special ministry was possible because of the Spirit’s presence and power (e.g., Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Zech 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was filled with God’s Spirit and empowered for a unique ministry (see Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38), and he spoke about the Spirit’s special role in the church (Acts 1:8). The arrival of the Spirit enabled the assembled believers to speak powerfully on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4-5, 16-18; cp. Joel 2:28-29). The Spirit emboldened and empowered the church after Pentecost (Acts 4:31; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5) and remains with God’s people today. The Spirit moves as circumstances require to provide spiritual renewal and strength to God’s people, and the Spirit continues to equip God’s people for whatever tasks he calls them to do.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 11:16-30; 24:1-9; 27:18-23; Deut 34:10-12; Judg 3:9-10; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6, 19; 15:14; 1 Sam 16:13; Pss 23; 46:1; 94:16-19; 116:1-9; 121:1-8; 143:10-12; Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5; Joel 2:28-29; Zech 4:6; Matt 12:18; Luke 4:1, 14, 18; John 3:34; Acts 1:8; 2:4, 16-18; 4:31; 10:38; 19:6; 20:28; 1 Cor 12:1-31; Gal 3:2-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Spirit Empowerment Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord re...","summary_en":"Spirit Empowerment Throughout Scripture, when the need arises, God empowers in special ways those who are committed to his service. The account of Moses and the seventy elders is one early instance, and it reminds us that God has moved and worked among his people in special ways throughout the ages. When Moses reached the end of his patience and his ability to manage rebellious Israel (Num 11:1-15), God told him to select seventy men to help him (11:16-17; cp. Exod 18:14-26). Then the Lord re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"35":[{"id":14171,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Being and Attributes of God","title_en":"Being and Attributes of God","content_ro":"<h3>GOD, Being and Attributes of<\/h3>\n<p>Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16-17; 17:22-31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes is seen in his work of redemption through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>How does Scripture express the characteristics of God? First, in the divine names by which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1; Ex 3:6, 14-15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts of Creation, fall, Flood, Babel, and the exodus, and more fully in the various covenants God made with his people. To Israel, he identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh, he identified himself as the “God of Israel” or the “God of the Hebrews” (5:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>By the time the people of Israel had reached Mt Sinai, the revelation of God’s attributes in the biblical narrative had become more explicit: “The <span>Lord<\/span>, the <span>Lord<\/span>, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This summary is repeated elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18; Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>• Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>• Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAttributesofGod\">The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>The historic Christian confessions refer to various characteristics of God without calling them attributes or classifying them. The Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency toward classification, describing God as “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” The first four attributes qualify the others.<\/p>\n<p>Several ways of classifying the attributes have been suggested. Generally such schemes divide the divine attributes into pairs: negative and positive, natural and moral, absolute and relative, immanent and eminent, intransitive and transitive, quiescent and operative, antithetical and synthetical, or incommunicable and communicable. Roman Catholics prefer the distinction of negative and positive, or natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor the distinction between quiescent and operative attributes. Reformed and evangelical scholars usually distinguish incommunicable and communicable attributes. Karl Barth grouped the attributes under freedom and love, and then proposed pairs of attributes that reflect freedom-love or love-freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels given the groups of attributes, surprising agreement exists in the attributes listed under each group.<\/p>\n<p>This article will make a distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes without considering the classification itself as significant. No classification of God’s attributes is fully satisfactory. The <em>incommunicable<\/em> attributes emphasize the absolute distinctness of God, his transcendent greatness and exalted nature. Such attributes have little or no analogy in God’s creatures. The <em>communicable<\/em> attributes find some reflection or analogy in human beings created in God’s image. They indicate the immanence of God in relation to creatures. Yet all the attributes are God’s attributes; the distinction between God and man, between Creator and creature, is always basic.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncommunicableAttributes\">Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Acknowledging some diversity of theological opinion, the following attributes will be considered incommunicable: unity, spirituality, independence, immutability, eternity, and immensity. In addition, the incomprehensibility of God must be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>incomprehensibility<\/em> is sometimes included in lists of his attributes. It seems preferable to regard it as a description of human inability to understand God fully. Incomprehensibility is therefore not an attribute, although it is a given in every discussion of God. Through his revelation God is truly known by faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever fully understand any one of God’s attributes. Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibility should contribute to a spirit of humility in every consideration of God and his attributes (Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8-9; Mt 11:25-27; Rom 11:33-36; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 13:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>unity<\/em> is an expression of monotheism—the fact that the God of Scripture is the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of human imagination. This attribute is reflected in the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>spirituality<\/em> indicates that God is not physical and is invisible. Positively it means that God is personal, living, self-conscious, and self-determining. The invisible God cannot be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the second commandment forbids every visible representation of God (20:4). Because God is Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>independence<\/em> or self-existence indicates that he is not dependent upon anything outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his existence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God has “life in himself” (Jn 5:26) and “he himself gives life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25). To Israel, he revealed himself as the “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant people for his own possession. God continues to work out his will in the world, and even though he uses various means, his independence remains intact. Thus, he enters into fellowship with his covenant people, and he publishes the gospel through human agents.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immutability<\/em> or constancy expresses his changelessness and his faithfulness to himself, to his decrees, promises, and works. He remains forever the same true God who undergoes no change from within or from anything outside himself. And so in James 1:17 we read: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God’s oath to Abraham expressed his immutability so that his covenant people could be sure of the “unchangeable character of his purpose” (Heb 6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord would not “change his mind; for he is not a man” (1 Sm 15:29, <span>niv<\/span>; cf. Nm 23:19). “For I the <span>Lord<\/span> do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s explanation for not destroying sinful Judah; he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” Christians are warned not to be “led by diverse and strange teachings” (Heb 13:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>God’s immutability or constancy does not imply that he is static or immobile. He is a dynamic, living God who is constantly working (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind (Gn 6:6-7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their contexts, such figurative expressions show the constancy of a God who, in holiness and righteousness, always abhors sin and reacts against it. In his grace and mercy, he forgives the penitent, and he carries out his promises without fail (Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Jer 18:7-10; Eph 1:11). Thus, the constancy of God is significant in all human relationships with him, including petitions offered in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>eternity<\/em> indicates his transcendence over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He has no beginning or end; he does not undergo growth, development, or maturation. He existed before the creation of the world; he dwells now in eternity; he will continue as the eternal God even when history ends. Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt 33:27), “the King” (1 Tm 1:17), “the beginning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is above time and is timeless, time is his creation and history is the arena of his work. “When the time had fully come God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on a Friday and rose on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immensity<\/em> and <em>omnipresence<\/em> express his transcendence over space. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:23-24). Heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool, so he is not restricted to a temple building (Is 66:1; Acts 17:24). Yet God is immanent in this world and is actively at work in it to establish his kingdom. No one can hide from the omnipresent God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised, “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). Since Pentecost (Acts 2), the Holy Spirit is said actually to dwell within the bodies of believers (1 Cor 6:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CommunicableAttributes\">Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Many attributes of God can be classified under this heading, although it is sometimes difficult to say which biblical references to God should be regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of terminology is found in Scripture, with many synonyms. For convenience, the communicable attributes are often classified as intellectual, moral, and volitional.<\/p>\n<h5>Intellectual Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>knowledge<\/em> indicates that in a unique way God knows himself and all things possible and actual. <em>Omniscience<\/em> means that “he knows everything” (1 Jn 3:20). “Even before a word is on my tongue, lo, O <span>Lord<\/span>, thou knowest it altogether” (Ps 139:4), including the secret thoughts of a person’s heart. God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps 94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a source of comfort (139:1-5). All the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3); therefore, the Christian is told to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes renewal in knowledge to become more like Christ (Col 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>wisdom<\/em> indicates that he uses his knowledge in the best possible manner to achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The <span>Lord<\/span> by wisdom founded the earth” (Prv 3:19); his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn 50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ reveals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens awe and praise (Rom 11:33-36). Human beings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10; Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the wisdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>veracity<\/em> expresses his truthfulness and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faithful to himself, to his Word, and to his promises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1:5); therefore, his followers are to walk in the light (vv 6-7). Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6); hence, Christians are to walk in the truth and show faithfulness in their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Moral Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>The most comprehensive description of God’s moral character is his <em>goodness.<\/em> God deals bountifully and kindly with all his creatures. He is “good to all” (Ps 145:9). Jesus insisted that “no one is good but God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 106:1; 107:1; 118:1; 136:1; Jer 33:11) and are called upon to emulate this divine characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>love<\/em> is the heartbeat of the gospel. Perfect love flows among the Persons of the Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed himself as abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (Ex 34:6-7), and all his covenantal relations with Abraham’s descendants showed his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of God’s love was the sending of his Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who declared that “God is love,” pointed to the cross to indicate what that love really meant: “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8, 10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is called <em>grace<\/em> (Eph 1:6-8; 2:7-9; Ti 3:4). <em>Mercy<\/em> is God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to those in misery and distress. God is <em>longsuffering<\/em> or patient in his love; he gives time for repentance.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>holiness<\/em> depicts the moral purity and excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ holiness is applicable to each of the Persons of the Trinity: “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The root idea of holiness is to be separate or set apart. Because of his inherent holiness, God is distinct from everything impure or unholy. God alone is holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3, 9; 111:9; Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8). Objects, places, and people are called holy when set apart for the worship of God. Because God is holy, his people are called to holiness (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14-15). God’s discipline of his people is aimed at making them share his holiness (Heb 12:10). The holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as God’s chief attribute.<\/p>\n<h5>Volitional Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereignty<\/em> indicates the divine authority with which he rules the entire creation and in his sovereign good pleasure does whatever he wills. God is King over the entire creation, and he rules the destiny of human beings and nations. He restores his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen Lord revealed that all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him (Mt 28:18). Election to salvation in Christ is “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created the world and gave his law as the rule for his people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and judges. God is the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to obedient love (Dt 6:4-5; Mt 22:37-40; 1 Jn 5:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereign power<\/em> means that he is without bounds or limit in ability; he is <em>omnipotent<\/em> or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word, he created all things, and upholds “the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is nothing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn 18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gracious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk 1:37; 2 Tm 2:13; Heb 6:18). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom 1:16), for Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor 1:24). Hence, believers must come to know “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Glory<\/h5>\n<p>All the attributes of God are summarized in Scripture’s references to the <em>glory<\/em> of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty, and brilliance of God who dwells in unapproachable light are expressed by this indefinable term. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (Acts 7:2); God showed his glory to Moses (Ex 33:18-19; 34:6-7). The God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Father of glory (Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 19:1); the majesty and glory of God fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be for the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Human beings were created for God’s glory, and Christian believers are instructed to do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31), thus reflecting in themselves his inherent glory.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOD, Being and Attributes of<\/h3>\n<p>Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16-17; 17:22-31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes is seen in his work of redemption through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>How does Scripture express the characteristics of God? First, in the divine names by which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1; Ex 3:6, 14-15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts of Creation, fall, Flood, Babel, and the exodus, and more fully in the various covenants God made with his people. To Israel, he identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh, he identified himself as the “God of Israel” or the “God of the Hebrews” (5:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>By the time the people of Israel had reached Mt Sinai, the revelation of God’s attributes in the biblical narrative had become more explicit: “The <span>Lord<\/span>, the <span>Lord<\/span>, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This summary is repeated elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18; Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>• Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>• Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAttributesofGod\">The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>The historic Christian confessions refer to various characteristics of God without calling them attributes or classifying them. The Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency toward classification, describing God as “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” The first four attributes qualify the others.<\/p>\n<p>Several ways of classifying the attributes have been suggested. Generally such schemes divide the divine attributes into pairs: negative and positive, natural and moral, absolute and relative, immanent and eminent, intransitive and transitive, quiescent and operative, antithetical and synthetical, or incommunicable and communicable. Roman Catholics prefer the distinction of negative and positive, or natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor the distinction between quiescent and operative attributes. Reformed and evangelical scholars usually distinguish incommunicable and communicable attributes. Karl Barth grouped the attributes under freedom and love, and then proposed pairs of attributes that reflect freedom-love or love-freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels given the groups of attributes, surprising agreement exists in the attributes listed under each group.<\/p>\n<p>This article will make a distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes without considering the classification itself as significant. No classification of God’s attributes is fully satisfactory. The <em>incommunicable<\/em> attributes emphasize the absolute distinctness of God, his transcendent greatness and exalted nature. Such attributes have little or no analogy in God’s creatures. The <em>communicable<\/em> attributes find some reflection or analogy in human beings created in God’s image. They indicate the immanence of God in relation to creatures. Yet all the attributes are God’s attributes; the distinction between God and man, between Creator and creature, is always basic.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncommunicableAttributes\">Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Acknowledging some diversity of theological opinion, the following attributes will be considered incommunicable: unity, spirituality, independence, immutability, eternity, and immensity. In addition, the incomprehensibility of God must be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>incomprehensibility<\/em> is sometimes included in lists of his attributes. It seems preferable to regard it as a description of human inability to understand God fully. Incomprehensibility is therefore not an attribute, although it is a given in every discussion of God. Through his revelation God is truly known by faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever fully understand any one of God’s attributes. Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibility should contribute to a spirit of humility in every consideration of God and his attributes (Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8-9; Mt 11:25-27; Rom 11:33-36; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 13:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>unity<\/em> is an expression of monotheism—the fact that the God of Scripture is the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of human imagination. This attribute is reflected in the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>spirituality<\/em> indicates that God is not physical and is invisible. Positively it means that God is personal, living, self-conscious, and self-determining. The invisible God cannot be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the second commandment forbids every visible representation of God (20:4). Because God is Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>independence<\/em> or self-existence indicates that he is not dependent upon anything outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his existence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God has “life in himself” (Jn 5:26) and “he himself gives life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25). To Israel, he revealed himself as the “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant people for his own possession. God continues to work out his will in the world, and even though he uses various means, his independence remains intact. Thus, he enters into fellowship with his covenant people, and he publishes the gospel through human agents.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immutability<\/em> or constancy expresses his changelessness and his faithfulness to himself, to his decrees, promises, and works. He remains forever the same true God who undergoes no change from within or from anything outside himself. And so in James 1:17 we read: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God’s oath to Abraham expressed his immutability so that his covenant people could be sure of the “unchangeable character of his purpose” (Heb 6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord would not “change his mind; for he is not a man” (1 Sm 15:29, <span>niv<\/span>; cf. Nm 23:19). “For I the <span>Lord<\/span> do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s explanation for not destroying sinful Judah; he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” Christians are warned not to be “led by diverse and strange teachings” (Heb 13:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>God’s immutability or constancy does not imply that he is static or immobile. He is a dynamic, living God who is constantly working (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind (Gn 6:6-7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their contexts, such figurative expressions show the constancy of a God who, in holiness and righteousness, always abhors sin and reacts against it. In his grace and mercy, he forgives the penitent, and he carries out his promises without fail (Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Jer 18:7-10; Eph 1:11). Thus, the constancy of God is significant in all human relationships with him, including petitions offered in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>eternity<\/em> indicates his transcendence over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He has no beginning or end; he does not undergo growth, development, or maturation. He existed before the creation of the world; he dwells now in eternity; he will continue as the eternal God even when history ends. Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt 33:27), “the King” (1 Tm 1:17), “the beginning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is above time and is timeless, time is his creation and history is the arena of his work. “When the time had fully come God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on a Friday and rose on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immensity<\/em> and <em>omnipresence<\/em> express his transcendence over space. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:23-24). Heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool, so he is not restricted to a temple building (Is 66:1; Acts 17:24). Yet God is immanent in this world and is actively at work in it to establish his kingdom. No one can hide from the omnipresent God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised, “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). Since Pentecost (Acts 2), the Holy Spirit is said actually to dwell within the bodies of believers (1 Cor 6:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CommunicableAttributes\">Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Many attributes of God can be classified under this heading, although it is sometimes difficult to say which biblical references to God should be regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of terminology is found in Scripture, with many synonyms. For convenience, the communicable attributes are often classified as intellectual, moral, and volitional.<\/p>\n<h5>Intellectual Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>knowledge<\/em> indicates that in a unique way God knows himself and all things possible and actual. <em>Omniscience<\/em> means that “he knows everything” (1 Jn 3:20). “Even before a word is on my tongue, lo, O <span>Lord<\/span>, thou knowest it altogether” (Ps 139:4), including the secret thoughts of a person’s heart. God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps 94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a source of comfort (139:1-5). All the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3); therefore, the Christian is told to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes renewal in knowledge to become more like Christ (Col 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>wisdom<\/em> indicates that he uses his knowledge in the best possible manner to achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The <span>Lord<\/span> by wisdom founded the earth” (Prv 3:19); his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn 50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ reveals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens awe and praise (Rom 11:33-36). Human beings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10; Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the wisdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>veracity<\/em> expresses his truthfulness and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faithful to himself, to his Word, and to his promises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1:5); therefore, his followers are to walk in the light (vv 6-7). Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6); hence, Christians are to walk in the truth and show faithfulness in their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Moral Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>The most comprehensive description of God’s moral character is his <em>goodness.<\/em> God deals bountifully and kindly with all his creatures. He is “good to all” (Ps 145:9). Jesus insisted that “no one is good but God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 106:1; 107:1; 118:1; 136:1; Jer 33:11) and are called upon to emulate this divine characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>love<\/em> is the heartbeat of the gospel. Perfect love flows among the Persons of the Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed himself as abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (Ex 34:6-7), and all his covenantal relations with Abraham’s descendants showed his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of God’s love was the sending of his Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who declared that “God is love,” pointed to the cross to indicate what that love really meant: “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8, 10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is called <em>grace<\/em> (Eph 1:6-8; 2:7-9; Ti 3:4). <em>Mercy<\/em> is God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to those in misery and distress. God is <em>longsuffering<\/em> or patient in his love; he gives time for repentance.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>holiness<\/em> depicts the moral purity and excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ holiness is applicable to each of the Persons of the Trinity: “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The root idea of holiness is to be separate or set apart. Because of his inherent holiness, God is distinct from everything impure or unholy. God alone is holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3, 9; 111:9; Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8). Objects, places, and people are called holy when set apart for the worship of God. Because God is holy, his people are called to holiness (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14-15). God’s discipline of his people is aimed at making them share his holiness (Heb 12:10). The holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as God’s chief attribute.<\/p>\n<h5>Volitional Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereignty<\/em> indicates the divine authority with which he rules the entire creation and in his sovereign good pleasure does whatever he wills. God is King over the entire creation, and he rules the destiny of human beings and nations. He restores his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen Lord revealed that all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him (Mt 28:18). Election to salvation in Christ is “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created the world and gave his law as the rule for his people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and judges. God is the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to obedient love (Dt 6:4-5; Mt 22:37-40; 1 Jn 5:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereign power<\/em> means that he is without bounds or limit in ability; he is <em>omnipotent<\/em> or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word, he created all things, and upholds “the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is nothing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn 18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gracious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk 1:37; 2 Tm 2:13; Heb 6:18). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom 1:16), for Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor 1:24). Hence, believers must come to know “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Glory<\/h5>\n<p>All the attributes of God are summarized in Scripture’s references to the <em>glory<\/em> of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty, and brilliance of God who dwells in unapproachable light are expressed by this indefinable term. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (Acts 7:2); God showed his glory to Moses (Ex 33:18-19; 34:6-7). The God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Father of glory (Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 19:1); the majesty and glory of God fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be for the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Human beings were created for God’s glory, and Christian believers are instructed to do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31), thus reflecting in themselves his inherent glory.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOD, Being and Attributes of Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption. According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Ac...","summary_en":"GOD, Being and Attributes of Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption. According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Ac...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65442,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93068,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120694,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148320,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"36":[{"id":11197,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Eternal Life","title_en":"Eternal Life","content_ro":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\n<p>The rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>In his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\n<p>The definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\n<p>John clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, <span>rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\n<p>The rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>In his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\n<p>The definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\n<p>John clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, <span>rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","summary_en":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38782,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Wrath of God","title_en":"Wrath of God","content_ro":"<h3>WRATH OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>A term for God’s displeasure with human beings and their sinful actions. The word “wrath” is a concept represented by many different words and idioms in the original languages of the Bible, all of which express the notion of justifiable anger for unjust actions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God is said to be angry with nations, sinners, and even with his covenant people. God’s anger is first expressed toward the covenant community of Israel for having refused to believe his word about entering into the Promised Land. After they had been rescued from Egypt, had received the Ten Commandments and the covenant, and had seen his glory (Nm 11:10; 12:9; 22:22; 32:10-14), they still disbelieved. Consequently, God in his wrath condemned the Israelites to wander in the wilderness until they died. The major reason for the Lord’s anger in the OT was that his own people constantly broke the covenant. They provoked him by their idolatry (Dt 2:15; 4:25; 9:7-8, 19; Jgs 2:14; 1 Kgs 11:9; 14:9, 15; 2 Kgs 17:18), by their mixing paganism with the worship of the Lord (Is 1:10-17; Jer 6:20; Hos 6:6; Am 5:21-27); by their wanton rebellion (1 Kgs 8:46), their unbelief (Nm 11:33; 14:11, 33; Ps 95:10-11), and their disregard for his concern for love, justice, righteousness, and holiness (Ex 22:22-24; Is 1:15-17; Am 5:7-12; Mi 3:1).<\/p>\n<p>The wrath of God also extends to all humanity (Na 1:2). The concept of the Day of the Lord was developed by the prophets to warn Israel and the nations that no one can escape the righteous expression of God’s wrath (Am 5:18-20). The Day of the Lord is the day of his wrath (Zep 1:15).<\/p>\n<p>The OT presents the concept of the wrath of God in balance with three other doctrines: his forbearance, his love, and his readiness to forgive. First, God is patient. The Hebrew word for “patient” is related to the word for “wrath” and means “length of wrath”; that is, God does not quickly become angry. He is longsuffering (Ex 34:6). Second, God is full of compassion and fidelity (Ex 34:6). Even when his children sin against him, he is like a father who is full of compassion and love. He is always faithful to his children. Third, he is ready to forgive those who sin against him when they atone for and are cleansed from their sins (Ex 34:6). The pleasure of his love is so much greater than his wrath (Ps 30:5). Micah prayed that the Lord may soon forgive and restore his people on the ground that he cannot be angry forever (7:18; cf. Ps 89:46; Jer 3:5). In Psalm 103:8-13, the psalmist likens God’s love and forgiveness to that of a father who does not harbor his anger continually, nor does he vex his children with discipline, so great is his love for those who fear him.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of God’s wrath is not to destroy humanity (Hos 11:9). His wrath is neither a vindictive, emotional overreaction, nor is it unpredictable. In his wrath he sovereignly imposes limits on nations (Babylon, Assyria) and disciplines his own people with the desired end that they return to him (Jl 2:13-14). The OT presentation of the Day of the Lord doesn’t end with God’s anger; it concludes with the restoration of the earth, when the whole earth will be filled with knowledge of God (Is 11:9; Hb 2:14) and wickedness will be no more (Is 65:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT also teaches the wrath of God side by side with the doctrine of his grace, love, and forbearance (Mt 3:7; Lk 21:23; Jn 3:36; Rom 1:18; Eph 5:6; Rv 14:10). Those who do not profess faith in the risen Christ remain in their sins and will be subject to God’s wrath, whereas those who believe in him are delivered from God’s wrath (Eph 2:3; 1 Thes 1:10). The good news of the NT is that Jesus has come to deliver us from the wrath of God (Rom 5:9). Those who have been delivered are reconciled with God (v 10) because they no longer are under condemnation (8:1).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Death; Hell; Judgment; Last Judgment; Love.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WRATH OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>A term for God’s displeasure with human beings and their sinful actions. The word “wrath” is a concept represented by many different words and idioms in the original languages of the Bible, all of which express the notion of justifiable anger for unjust actions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God is said to be angry with nations, sinners, and even with his covenant people. God’s anger is first expressed toward the covenant community of Israel for having refused to believe his word about entering into the Promised Land. After they had been rescued from Egypt, had received the Ten Commandments and the covenant, and had seen his glory (Nm 11:10; 12:9; 22:22; 32:10-14), they still disbelieved. Consequently, God in his wrath condemned the Israelites to wander in the wilderness until they died. The major reason for the Lord’s anger in the OT was that his own people constantly broke the covenant. They provoked him by their idolatry (Dt 2:15; 4:25; 9:7-8, 19; Jgs 2:14; 1 Kgs 11:9; 14:9, 15; 2 Kgs 17:18), by their mixing paganism with the worship of the Lord (Is 1:10-17; Jer 6:20; Hos 6:6; Am 5:21-27); by their wanton rebellion (1 Kgs 8:46), their unbelief (Nm 11:33; 14:11, 33; Ps 95:10-11), and their disregard for his concern for love, justice, righteousness, and holiness (Ex 22:22-24; Is 1:15-17; Am 5:7-12; Mi 3:1).<\/p>\n<p>The wrath of God also extends to all humanity (Na 1:2). The concept of the Day of the Lord was developed by the prophets to warn Israel and the nations that no one can escape the righteous expression of God’s wrath (Am 5:18-20). The Day of the Lord is the day of his wrath (Zep 1:15).<\/p>\n<p>The OT presents the concept of the wrath of God in balance with three other doctrines: his forbearance, his love, and his readiness to forgive. First, God is patient. The Hebrew word for “patient” is related to the word for “wrath” and means “length of wrath”; that is, God does not quickly become angry. He is longsuffering (Ex 34:6). Second, God is full of compassion and fidelity (Ex 34:6). Even when his children sin against him, he is like a father who is full of compassion and love. He is always faithful to his children. Third, he is ready to forgive those who sin against him when they atone for and are cleansed from their sins (Ex 34:6). The pleasure of his love is so much greater than his wrath (Ps 30:5). Micah prayed that the Lord may soon forgive and restore his people on the ground that he cannot be angry forever (7:18; cf. Ps 89:46; Jer 3:5). In Psalm 103:8-13, the psalmist likens God’s love and forgiveness to that of a father who does not harbor his anger continually, nor does he vex his children with discipline, so great is his love for those who fear him.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of God’s wrath is not to destroy humanity (Hos 11:9). His wrath is neither a vindictive, emotional overreaction, nor is it unpredictable. In his wrath he sovereignly imposes limits on nations (Babylon, Assyria) and disciplines his own people with the desired end that they return to him (Jl 2:13-14). The OT presentation of the Day of the Lord doesn’t end with God’s anger; it concludes with the restoration of the earth, when the whole earth will be filled with knowledge of God (Is 11:9; Hb 2:14) and wickedness will be no more (Is 65:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT also teaches the wrath of God side by side with the doctrine of his grace, love, and forbearance (Mt 3:7; Lk 21:23; Jn 3:36; Rom 1:18; Eph 5:6; Rv 14:10). Those who do not profess faith in the risen Christ remain in their sins and will be subject to God’s wrath, whereas those who believe in him are delivered from God’s wrath (Eph 2:3; 1 Thes 1:10). The good news of the NT is that Jesus has come to deliver us from the wrath of God (Rom 5:9). Those who have been delivered are reconciled with God (v 10) because they no longer are under condemnation (8:1).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Death; Hell; Judgment; Last Judgment; Love.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WRATH OF GOD A term for God’s displeasure with human beings and their sinful actions. The word “wrath” is a concept represented by many different words and idioms in the original languages of the Bible, all of which express the notion of justifiable anger for unjust actions. In the Old Testament In the OT God is said to be angry with nations, sinners, and even with his covenant people. God’s anger is first expressed toward the covenant community of Israel for having refused to believe his wor...","summary_en":"WRATH OF GOD A term for God’s displeasure with human beings and their sinful actions. The word “wrath” is a concept represented by many different words and idioms in the original languages of the Bible, all of which express the notion of justifiable anger for unjust actions. In the Old Testament In the OT God is said to be angry with nations, sinners, and even with his covenant people. God’s anger is first expressed toward the covenant community of Israel for having refused to believe his wor...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56371,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:36<\/strong> God gave the gift of <em>eternal life<\/em><em>,<\/em> promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under <em>God’s angry judgment<\/em> (Rom 1–3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:36<\/strong> God gave the gift of <em>eternal life<\/em><em>,<\/em> promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under <em>God’s angry judgment<\/em> (Rom 1–3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:36 God gave the gift of eternal life, promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under God’s angry judgment (Rom 1–3).","summary_en":"3:36 God gave the gift of eternal life, promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under God’s angry judgment (Rom 1–3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83997,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:36<\/strong> God gave the gift of <em>eternal life<\/em><em>,<\/em> promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under <em>God’s angry judgment<\/em> (Rom 1–3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:36<\/strong> God gave the gift of <em>eternal life<\/em><em>,<\/em> promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under <em>God’s angry judgment<\/em> (Rom 1–3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:36 God gave the gift of eternal life, promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under God’s angry judgment (Rom 1–3).","summary_en":"3:36 God gave the gift of eternal life, promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under God’s angry judgment (Rom 1–3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111623,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:36<\/strong> God gave the gift of <em>eternal life<\/em><em>,<\/em> promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under <em>God’s angry judgment<\/em> (Rom 1–3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:36<\/strong> God gave the gift of <em>eternal life<\/em><em>,<\/em> promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under <em>God’s angry judgment<\/em> (Rom 1–3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:36 God gave the gift of eternal life, promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under God’s angry judgment (Rom 1–3).","summary_en":"3:36 God gave the gift of eternal life, promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under God’s angry judgment (Rom 1–3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139249,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 3:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 3:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:36<\/strong> God gave the gift of <em>eternal life<\/em><em>,<\/em> promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under <em>God’s angry judgment<\/em> (Rom 1–3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>3:36<\/strong> God gave the gift of <em>eternal life<\/em><em>,<\/em> promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under <em>God’s angry judgment<\/em> (Rom 1–3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:36 God gave the gift of eternal life, promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under God’s angry judgment (Rom 1–3).","summary_en":"3:36 God gave the gift of eternal life, promising new life and intimacy in a present experience with God. • Those who reject the Son will not see life. The world in its darkness stands under God’s angry judgment (Rom 1–3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66053,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66397,"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":67732,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"By Faith","title_en":"By Faith","content_ro":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","summary_en":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93679,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94023,"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":95358,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"By Faith","title_en":"By Faith","content_ro":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","summary_en":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121305,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121649,"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":122984,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"By Faith","title_en":"By Faith","content_ro":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","summary_en":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148931,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149275,"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":150610,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"By Faith","title_en":"By Faith","content_ro":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>By Faith<\/h3>\n<p>Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive essay on faith. It describes faith as involving confident action in response to what God has made known. As seen in the examples listed throughout the chapter, faith comes into play in a variety of life’s circumstances. The results of faith also vary. Some people get rescued, achieve success in life, and get some of what God has promised in their lifetimes. Others get mocked, beaten, tortured, put in prison, and killed. Faith is sometimes rewarded sooner and sometimes later, but regardless, people of faith anticipate the rewards because of their confidence in God’s character.<\/p>\n<p>What does it mean to live by faith? It means that in our various circumstances we live out our belief “that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (11:6). Those who live by faith take confident action based on what God has revealed about his character, seeking to do his will in all things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; 2 Chr 20:20; Hab 2:4; Matt 9:29; 21:21; Luke 8:50; John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 11:25; 12:46; 20:30-31; Rom 5:1; 10:9, 17; Gal 3:6; 5:6; 1 Tim 1:19; 6:12; Heb 10:22, 38; 11:1-40; Jas 1:5-6; 2:14-26; 1 Jn 3:23; 5:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","summary_en":"By Faith Faith is a foundational theme in Scripture, yet misconceptions about faith abound. Some see faith as meaning any form of spirituality (“he\/she is a person of faith”). Others understand it as a resolute belief that something good is going to happen to them—it is a ticket to health and wealth. Still others think that faith is a blind leap against known facts. None of these ideas constitutes biblical faith. Hebrews 11, one of the most loved passages of Scripture, provides an extensive e...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Ioan 3
— 36 versete
Ioan 3
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse