Citește Biblia

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":6486,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible* (New Testament), Chronology","title_en":"of the Bible* (New Testament), Chronology","content_ro":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.<\/p>\n\n<p>A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into <span>BC<\/span> (before Christ) and <span>AD<\/span> (<em>anno Domini,<\/em> “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChronologyofJesusLife\">Chronology of Jesus’ Life<\/p>\n<h5>Birth<\/h5>\n<p>According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century <span>AD<\/span> historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 <span>BC<\/span>. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.<\/p>\n<p>Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 <span>BC<\/span>. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in <span>AD<\/span> 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginning of Public Ministry<\/h5>\n<p>Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets <span>AD<\/span> 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely <span>AD<\/span> 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before <span>AD<\/span> 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in <span>AD<\/span> 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is <span>AD<\/span> 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.<\/p>\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 50<\/h4>\n<p>Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks\/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.<\/p>\n<p>After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.<\/p>\n<p>One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in <span>AD<\/span> 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.<\/p>\n<p>Since Herod Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.<\/p>\n<p>When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.<\/p>\n<p>The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).<\/p>\n\n<p>Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas\/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of those arguments for chronology is that, according to the first view, Paul’s conversion came 17 years before the famine visit of Acts 11:30 (cf. Gal 1:18; 2:1). According to the second view, Paul’s conversion took place 17 years before the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The difference amounts to only one year, however.<\/p>\n<p>It is helpful to consider one more date that can be fixed with high probability—namely, Paul’s arrival in Corinth on his second missionary journey (Acts 18:1). On the second missionary journey (15:40–18:22), Paul and Silas set out on land through Syria, Cilicia, Phrygia, and Galatia, visiting churches founded on the first missionary journey. They came to Troas, then passed over to Philippi and continued down the coast through Thessalonica and Berea. Paul went on to Athens before arriving at Corinth. From Acts 18:12 we know that Gallio was a proconsul in Corinth while Paul was there. An inscription discovered at nearby Delphi indicates that in all likelihood Gallio’s term of office was from mid-51 to mid-52. The incident recorded in Acts 18:12-17 probably occurred at the beginning of Gallio’s term, since the Jews hoped to get a ruling against Paul from their new proconsul. Not long after that, Paul left Corinth, probably in the summer or autumn of 52. According to Acts 18:11 Paul had spent 18 months in Corinth; that means that he probably arrived in the early months of 50 or the end of 49. That arrival date is confirmed by Acts 18:2, which says that Aquila and Priscilla had only recently been exiled from Rome when Paul came to Corinth. A fifth-century historian, Orosius, dated the edict of Claudius expelling the Jews from Rome in <span>AD<\/span> 49. Therefore, Paul and Aquila and Priscilla probably arrived close together late in 49 or early in 50. Early in his 18-month stay Paul wrote his First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians.<\/p>\n<p>The two fixed dates, then, are 46 or 47 for the famine visit (Acts 11:30) and late 49 or early 50 for Paul’s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18:1). Taking into account the time gaps mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and 2:1, as well as the supposition that the first missionary journey lasted about a year, the two reconstructions are presented in the following table. Keep in mind that they are approximations and that they reflect the ancient custom of counting a part of a year as a whole year.<\/p>\n\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 70<\/h4>\n<p>Acts 24:27 describes an event that helps us date events in the rest of the book, namely, Porcius Festus’s replacement of Felix as the governor of Judea. A careful analysis of the evidence given by Eusebius, a fourth-century historian, leads to the probable conclusion that Felix was replaced in the summer of 59.<\/p>\n<p>Working backward from that date, Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21:33) must have occurred in 57, some two years before the coming of Festus. More precisely, Paul’s arrest probably occurred in the late spring or summer of 57; Paul’s goal (20:16) was to arrive in Jerusalem by Pentecost of that year, and Pentecost occurred at the end of May. He was not long in the city before he was arrested.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover festival, 50 days before Pentecost, was celebrated by Paul with the church in Philippi (Acts 20:6). That would have been April 7–14, <span>AD<\/span> 57. Only after the feast did he continue his hurried journey to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:6–21:16). Before his Passover visit to Philippi, Paul had spent three months in Greece (20:3). Allowing some time for him to travel through Macedonia and visit the Thessalonians and Bereans, those three months were probably the winter months of 56–57 (Acts 20:3; cf. 1 Cor 16:6). No doubt they were spent in the main church of Greece, Corinth, and were used in part for the writing of the Letter to the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Between Paul’s departure from Corinth on the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18) in the autumn of 51 and his arrival in Corinth on the third missionary journey (20:2) in the late winter of 56 are five years of activities that cannot be given exact dates. Paul said that he worked during three of those years in Ephesus (20:31; cf. 19:1–20:1). With enough time allowed for the travels before and after, that stay at Ephesus probably lasted from 52 or 53 to the summer of 55 or 56 (cf. 1 Cor 16:8). During his long stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote his First Letter to the Corinthians. Then, on his way to Corinth in 56, he wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia.<\/p>\n<p>Festus arrived as governor in the summer of 59, after Paul had been in prison in Caesarea for two years. Within a matter of days, Paul was tried before Festus (Acts 25:1-12). Not wanting to be remanded to the Jewish authorities, Paul appealed to Caesar (v 12), which meant that he would go to Rome. The account in Acts gives no hint of a delay, so the voyage most likely began in the summer or fall of 59 (27:2).<\/p>\n<p>Luke reported that when Paul the prisoner got to Fair Havens on the island of Crete, the weather had become dangerous for sea travel “because the fast had already gone by” (Acts 27:8-9). One ancient writer said that sailing became dangerous between mid-September and mid-November, and after that, impossible until spring. The fast referred to was no doubt the one in preparation for the Day of Atonement, which in the year 59 fell on October 5. It is not surprising that, 14 days after leaving Fair Havens, the ship in which Paul was traveling was wrecked on the coast of Malta, south of Sicily (vv 27-44). Three months later Paul set sail for Rome again in a ship that had spent the winter at Malta (28:11). Soon he was welcomed into Rome by Christians who came out to meet him (v 15). Thus Paul arrived in Rome in the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 60. The book of Acts closes with the remark that “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house” (v 30, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT does not report the outcome of his trial. During that period, according to the traditional view, he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius wrote, “Tradition has it that after defending himself the Apostle was again sent on the ministry of preaching, and coming a second time to the same city suffered martyrdom under Nero.” Nero, who was the Roman emperor from 54 to 68, put to death a multitude of Christians in Rome soon after a disastrous fire in July of 64, according to the Roman historian Tacitus. A number of early Christian writings (e.g., Clement) seem to indicate that Peter and Paul were both killed in Rome during that savage persecution. If so, and if Eusebius was right, then Paul may have spent the two years from 62 to 64 freely ministering back in the eastern provinces. Many conservative scholars date Paul’s First Letter to Timothy and his Letter to Titus from that period. Written from Rome shortly before Paul’s martyrdom in 64, 2 Timothy was probably his last letter (2 Tm 2:9; 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Jerusalem, within three years after Paul had been carried off to Rome, James the brother of Jesus was stoned to death by the Jewish authorities. According to Josephus, that occurred in 62. Not long afterward, according to Eusebius, the church in Jerusalem received a prophecy warning them to leave that doomed city and settle in Pella, one of the cities of the Decapolis (“ten cities”) east of the Jordan. Thus when war broke out between the Jews and the Romans in 66, the Christians for the most part escaped its fury. That war ended in 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Mk 13:2; Lk 21:24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Apostle, Apostleship; Age; “Date” under each NT book; First Jewish Revolt; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.<\/p>\n\n<p>A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into <span>BC<\/span> (before Christ) and <span>AD<\/span> (<em>anno Domini,<\/em> “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChronologyofJesusLife\">Chronology of Jesus’ Life<\/p>\n<h5>Birth<\/h5>\n<p>According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century <span>AD<\/span> historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 <span>BC<\/span>. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.<\/p>\n<p>Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 <span>BC<\/span>. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in <span>AD<\/span> 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginning of Public Ministry<\/h5>\n<p>Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets <span>AD<\/span> 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely <span>AD<\/span> 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before <span>AD<\/span> 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in <span>AD<\/span> 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is <span>AD<\/span> 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.<\/p>\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 50<\/h4>\n<p>Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks\/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.<\/p>\n<p>After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.<\/p>\n<p>One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in <span>AD<\/span> 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.<\/p>\n<p>Since Herod Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.<\/p>\n<p>When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.<\/p>\n<p>The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).<\/p>\n\n<p>Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas\/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of those arguments for chronology is that, according to the first view, Paul’s conversion came 17 years before the famine visit of Acts 11:30 (cf. Gal 1:18; 2:1). According to the second view, Paul’s conversion took place 17 years before the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The difference amounts to only one year, however.<\/p>\n<p>It is helpful to consider one more date that can be fixed with high probability—namely, Paul’s arrival in Corinth on his second missionary journey (Acts 18:1). On the second missionary journey (15:40–18:22), Paul and Silas set out on land through Syria, Cilicia, Phrygia, and Galatia, visiting churches founded on the first missionary journey. They came to Troas, then passed over to Philippi and continued down the coast through Thessalonica and Berea. Paul went on to Athens before arriving at Corinth. From Acts 18:12 we know that Gallio was a proconsul in Corinth while Paul was there. An inscription discovered at nearby Delphi indicates that in all likelihood Gallio’s term of office was from mid-51 to mid-52. The incident recorded in Acts 18:12-17 probably occurred at the beginning of Gallio’s term, since the Jews hoped to get a ruling against Paul from their new proconsul. Not long after that, Paul left Corinth, probably in the summer or autumn of 52. According to Acts 18:11 Paul had spent 18 months in Corinth; that means that he probably arrived in the early months of 50 or the end of 49. That arrival date is confirmed by Acts 18:2, which says that Aquila and Priscilla had only recently been exiled from Rome when Paul came to Corinth. A fifth-century historian, Orosius, dated the edict of Claudius expelling the Jews from Rome in <span>AD<\/span> 49. Therefore, Paul and Aquila and Priscilla probably arrived close together late in 49 or early in 50. Early in his 18-month stay Paul wrote his First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians.<\/p>\n<p>The two fixed dates, then, are 46 or 47 for the famine visit (Acts 11:30) and late 49 or early 50 for Paul’s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18:1). Taking into account the time gaps mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and 2:1, as well as the supposition that the first missionary journey lasted about a year, the two reconstructions are presented in the following table. Keep in mind that they are approximations and that they reflect the ancient custom of counting a part of a year as a whole year.<\/p>\n\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 70<\/h4>\n<p>Acts 24:27 describes an event that helps us date events in the rest of the book, namely, Porcius Festus’s replacement of Felix as the governor of Judea. A careful analysis of the evidence given by Eusebius, a fourth-century historian, leads to the probable conclusion that Felix was replaced in the summer of 59.<\/p>\n<p>Working backward from that date, Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21:33) must have occurred in 57, some two years before the coming of Festus. More precisely, Paul’s arrest probably occurred in the late spring or summer of 57; Paul’s goal (20:16) was to arrive in Jerusalem by Pentecost of that year, and Pentecost occurred at the end of May. He was not long in the city before he was arrested.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover festival, 50 days before Pentecost, was celebrated by Paul with the church in Philippi (Acts 20:6). That would have been April 7–14, <span>AD<\/span> 57. Only after the feast did he continue his hurried journey to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:6–21:16). Before his Passover visit to Philippi, Paul had spent three months in Greece (20:3). Allowing some time for him to travel through Macedonia and visit the Thessalonians and Bereans, those three months were probably the winter months of 56–57 (Acts 20:3; cf. 1 Cor 16:6). No doubt they were spent in the main church of Greece, Corinth, and were used in part for the writing of the Letter to the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Between Paul’s departure from Corinth on the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18) in the autumn of 51 and his arrival in Corinth on the third missionary journey (20:2) in the late winter of 56 are five years of activities that cannot be given exact dates. Paul said that he worked during three of those years in Ephesus (20:31; cf. 19:1–20:1). With enough time allowed for the travels before and after, that stay at Ephesus probably lasted from 52 or 53 to the summer of 55 or 56 (cf. 1 Cor 16:8). During his long stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote his First Letter to the Corinthians. Then, on his way to Corinth in 56, he wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia.<\/p>\n<p>Festus arrived as governor in the summer of 59, after Paul had been in prison in Caesarea for two years. Within a matter of days, Paul was tried before Festus (Acts 25:1-12). Not wanting to be remanded to the Jewish authorities, Paul appealed to Caesar (v 12), which meant that he would go to Rome. The account in Acts gives no hint of a delay, so the voyage most likely began in the summer or fall of 59 (27:2).<\/p>\n<p>Luke reported that when Paul the prisoner got to Fair Havens on the island of Crete, the weather had become dangerous for sea travel “because the fast had already gone by” (Acts 27:8-9). One ancient writer said that sailing became dangerous between mid-September and mid-November, and after that, impossible until spring. The fast referred to was no doubt the one in preparation for the Day of Atonement, which in the year 59 fell on October 5. It is not surprising that, 14 days after leaving Fair Havens, the ship in which Paul was traveling was wrecked on the coast of Malta, south of Sicily (vv 27-44). Three months later Paul set sail for Rome again in a ship that had spent the winter at Malta (28:11). Soon he was welcomed into Rome by Christians who came out to meet him (v 15). Thus Paul arrived in Rome in the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 60. The book of Acts closes with the remark that “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house” (v 30, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT does not report the outcome of his trial. During that period, according to the traditional view, he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius wrote, “Tradition has it that after defending himself the Apostle was again sent on the ministry of preaching, and coming a second time to the same city suffered martyrdom under Nero.” Nero, who was the Roman emperor from 54 to 68, put to death a multitude of Christians in Rome soon after a disastrous fire in July of 64, according to the Roman historian Tacitus. A number of early Christian writings (e.g., Clement) seem to indicate that Peter and Paul were both killed in Rome during that savage persecution. If so, and if Eusebius was right, then Paul may have spent the two years from 62 to 64 freely ministering back in the eastern provinces. Many conservative scholars date Paul’s First Letter to Timothy and his Letter to Titus from that period. Written from Rome shortly before Paul’s martyrdom in 64, 2 Timothy was probably his last letter (2 Tm 2:9; 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Jerusalem, within three years after Paul had been carried off to Rome, James the brother of Jesus was stoned to death by the Jewish authorities. According to Josephus, that occurred in 62. Not long afterward, according to Eusebius, the church in Jerusalem received a prophecy warning them to leave that doomed city and settle in Pella, one of the cities of the Decapolis (“ten cities”) east of the Jordan. Thus when war broke out between the Jews and the Romans in 66, the Christians for the most part escaped its fury. That war ended in 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Mk 13:2; Lk 21:24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Apostle, Apostleship; Age; “Date” under each NT book; First Jewish Revolt; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates. A rema...","summary_en":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates. A rema...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12209,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","title_en":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","summary_en":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15645,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Healing Heal","title_en":"Healing Heal","content_ro":"<h3>HEAL, HEALING<\/h3>\n<p>To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal relationship with himself. In a similar manner, Deuteronomy 32:39 speaks of God as the one who heals. The context in Deuteronomy implies that this healing power derives from the fact that God is God. This concept of God as the healer is echoed throughout the OT by the psalmists (Pss 6:2; 41:4; 103:3) and prophets (Is 19:22; Jer 17:14; Hos 7:1; Zec 11:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesustheHealerAccountsintheGospels\">Jesus the Healer: Accounts in the Gospels<\/p>\n<p>The NT significantly emphasizes Jesus as the healer. Mark portrays him as a teacher and healer in his opening account of Jesus’ ministry in Capernaum with the healing of the demoniac, Peter’s mother-in-law, the sick brought to him in the evening, and the leper (Mk 1:21-45). Indeed, healing sickness and casting out demons characterize Jesus’ ministry. Mark presents in rapid succession Jesus’ healing of the paralytic (2:1-12), the man with the withered hand (3:1-6), the multitudes by the sea (vv 7-12), the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20), the woman with a hemorrhage, and Jairus’s daughter (vv 21-43). Jesus then commissioned the Twelve to proclaim repentance, to cast out demons, and to heal the sick (6:7-13). He himself continued with healings at Gennesaret (vv 53-56), casting out the unclean spirit from the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman (7:24-30), healing the deaf and mute man (vv 31-37), the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26), the boy possessed with an evil spirit (9:14-20), and blind Bartimaeus (10:46-52).<\/p>\n<p>Certainly healing is an important aspect of Jesus’ ministry. The healings expressed not only his compassion for those suffering but also constituted a revelation of his person. This is brought out by the climactic statement of Jesus in healing the paralytic: “that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mk 2:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). It also seems that Mark intended his readers to understand that the healing of the deaf and mute man (7:31-37) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26) symbolize the awakening of spiritual understanding in the disciples of who Jesus is. It is also significant that Mark has placed the healing of Bartimaeus (10:46-52) immediately after Jesus’ third announcement of his own coming death (vv 32-34) and the disciples’ third failure to understand that his being the Messiah entailed the necessity of suffering (vv 35-45).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew also portrays Jesus as teaching, preaching, and healing (Mt 4:23-25), and parallels the accounts in Mark, except for the healing of the demoniac in the synagogue (Mk 1:23-28) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26). However, according to his special purpose and structure, Matthew has placed many of Jesus’ healings together in a “mighty works” section (Mt 8–9), complementing the “great words” (“sermon”) section (chs 5–7). Matthew views Jesus’ healings as directly fulfilling the OT, as he states in 8:17. The unique way in which the healings of 8:16 are spoken of as fulfilling Isaiah 53:4 seems to indicate that Jesus’ power over sickness derives in some way from his death for sin, which was to be accomplished at the end of his ministry.<\/p>\n<p>It is also interesting that Matthew, in relating Jesus’ healing of the multitudes by the sea (Mt 12:15-21; cf. Mk 3:7-12), cites Isaiah 42:1-4. This OT passage speaks of God’s servant anointed with the Spirit to proclaim justice to the nations. As used by Matthew, the quotation explains why Jesus commanded those healed not to make him known. Jesus did not want too much publicity about himself to thwart God’s plan for him as the Suffering Servant who was to bring salvation to the nations. This action demonstrates that Jesus’ healings are revelations of his person. Again another quotation from Isaiah (6:9-10) in Matthew 13:14-15 brings out the fact that healing is understood primarily in the spiritual sense of hearing Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>Luke, like Matthew and Mark, portrays Jesus preaching and healing. After the account of the birth of John and Jesus and the ministry of John the Baptist, Luke presents Jesus preaching in Nazareth (Lk 4:16-30). Here, in the synagogue of his hometown, Jesus himself, using a quotation from Isaiah 61:1-2, affirms that the Spirit has anointed him to proclaim good news and to announce release for the captives and a recovery of sight for the blind (Lk 4:18). The healing aspect of Jesus’ ministry occupies an important place in the rest of the book of Luke. Indeed, Luke has all the healing incidents noted by Mark, except for those in Mark 6:45–8:26. However, Luke’s opening scene in Nazareth seems to underscore that Jesus’ healing is to be understood, not as merely expressing Jesus’ compassion for the needy, but primarily as a sign of the arrival of the kingdom of God as promised in the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis may be seen in the distinctively Lukan account of the commissioning of the 72 disciples (Lk 10:1-12), where Jesus instructs them to heal the sick in any city they enter and announce to the people there that the kingdom of God has come near to them (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The first three Gospels take up the OT understanding of God as the healer of his people and see this as fulfilled in Jesus. This fulfillment signifies the presence of God’s reign in the ministry of Jesus and points to him as the one through whom God is at work in the midst of his people.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel has only four healing incidents: the official’s son (Jn 4:46-54), the man ill for 38 years (5:1-18), the man born blind (ch 9), and the climactic raising of Lazarus (11:1-44). The special purpose and structure of this Gospel indicate that these incidents are carefully related to the accompanying discourses and are clearly intended as signs revealing the person of Jesus. The heightened emphasis on healings as revelatory signs in this Gospel confirms the similar intention in the first three Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsDonebytheApostles\">Healings Done by the Apostles<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of the Apostles tells of the continuation of Jesus’ ministry through the Spirit at work in his disciples. The primary focus in Acts is on proclamation, as 1:8 indicates. However, the healing of the lame beggar in Jerusalem indicates that the disciples were able to exercise the power of healing in the name of Jesus (3:1-16; 4:8-16). The healing is clearly intended to point to and glorify the person of Jesus and lead to faith in him (3:12-26). The balanced, twofold ministry of the disciples may be seen in the prayer of 4:29-30: “O Lord, hear their threats, and give your servants great boldness in their preaching. Send your healing power; may miraculous signs and wonders be done through the name of your holy servant Jesus” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of Philip in Samaria was devoted to proclaiming Christ (Acts 8:5) and healing the sick and those with unclean spirits (v 7). Peter heals Aeneas and raises Tabitha (9:34, 40), and in each case the effects are that many believe in the Lord (vv 35, 42). Paul is also described as preaching the gospel (17:2-3), healing (14:8-11; 28:8), casting out spirits (16:18), and raising a dead man (20:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsintheChurchAge\">Healings in the Church Age<\/p>\n<p>The letters of the NT say little about healing. First Corinthians speaks of the gifts of healing (1 Cor 12:9, 28). The implication is that such gifts are intended to be part of the ministry of the church, but the context indicates that not all are given such gifts (v 30) and that it is God who sovereignly distributes gifts for the good of the body. James indicates that a believer who is ill should request the church to pray for his healing (Jas 5:14-16; cf. Heb 12:13). The clear implication is that God is willing and able to minister to his people for healing today.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAL, HEALING<\/h3>\n<p>To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal relationship with himself. In a similar manner, Deuteronomy 32:39 speaks of God as the one who heals. The context in Deuteronomy implies that this healing power derives from the fact that God is God. This concept of God as the healer is echoed throughout the OT by the psalmists (Pss 6:2; 41:4; 103:3) and prophets (Is 19:22; Jer 17:14; Hos 7:1; Zec 11:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesustheHealerAccountsintheGospels\">Jesus the Healer: Accounts in the Gospels<\/p>\n<p>The NT significantly emphasizes Jesus as the healer. Mark portrays him as a teacher and healer in his opening account of Jesus’ ministry in Capernaum with the healing of the demoniac, Peter’s mother-in-law, the sick brought to him in the evening, and the leper (Mk 1:21-45). Indeed, healing sickness and casting out demons characterize Jesus’ ministry. Mark presents in rapid succession Jesus’ healing of the paralytic (2:1-12), the man with the withered hand (3:1-6), the multitudes by the sea (vv 7-12), the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20), the woman with a hemorrhage, and Jairus’s daughter (vv 21-43). Jesus then commissioned the Twelve to proclaim repentance, to cast out demons, and to heal the sick (6:7-13). He himself continued with healings at Gennesaret (vv 53-56), casting out the unclean spirit from the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman (7:24-30), healing the deaf and mute man (vv 31-37), the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26), the boy possessed with an evil spirit (9:14-20), and blind Bartimaeus (10:46-52).<\/p>\n<p>Certainly healing is an important aspect of Jesus’ ministry. The healings expressed not only his compassion for those suffering but also constituted a revelation of his person. This is brought out by the climactic statement of Jesus in healing the paralytic: “that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mk 2:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). It also seems that Mark intended his readers to understand that the healing of the deaf and mute man (7:31-37) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26) symbolize the awakening of spiritual understanding in the disciples of who Jesus is. It is also significant that Mark has placed the healing of Bartimaeus (10:46-52) immediately after Jesus’ third announcement of his own coming death (vv 32-34) and the disciples’ third failure to understand that his being the Messiah entailed the necessity of suffering (vv 35-45).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew also portrays Jesus as teaching, preaching, and healing (Mt 4:23-25), and parallels the accounts in Mark, except for the healing of the demoniac in the synagogue (Mk 1:23-28) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26). However, according to his special purpose and structure, Matthew has placed many of Jesus’ healings together in a “mighty works” section (Mt 8–9), complementing the “great words” (“sermon”) section (chs 5–7). Matthew views Jesus’ healings as directly fulfilling the OT, as he states in 8:17. The unique way in which the healings of 8:16 are spoken of as fulfilling Isaiah 53:4 seems to indicate that Jesus’ power over sickness derives in some way from his death for sin, which was to be accomplished at the end of his ministry.<\/p>\n<p>It is also interesting that Matthew, in relating Jesus’ healing of the multitudes by the sea (Mt 12:15-21; cf. Mk 3:7-12), cites Isaiah 42:1-4. This OT passage speaks of God’s servant anointed with the Spirit to proclaim justice to the nations. As used by Matthew, the quotation explains why Jesus commanded those healed not to make him known. Jesus did not want too much publicity about himself to thwart God’s plan for him as the Suffering Servant who was to bring salvation to the nations. This action demonstrates that Jesus’ healings are revelations of his person. Again another quotation from Isaiah (6:9-10) in Matthew 13:14-15 brings out the fact that healing is understood primarily in the spiritual sense of hearing Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>Luke, like Matthew and Mark, portrays Jesus preaching and healing. After the account of the birth of John and Jesus and the ministry of John the Baptist, Luke presents Jesus preaching in Nazareth (Lk 4:16-30). Here, in the synagogue of his hometown, Jesus himself, using a quotation from Isaiah 61:1-2, affirms that the Spirit has anointed him to proclaim good news and to announce release for the captives and a recovery of sight for the blind (Lk 4:18). The healing aspect of Jesus’ ministry occupies an important place in the rest of the book of Luke. Indeed, Luke has all the healing incidents noted by Mark, except for those in Mark 6:45–8:26. However, Luke’s opening scene in Nazareth seems to underscore that Jesus’ healing is to be understood, not as merely expressing Jesus’ compassion for the needy, but primarily as a sign of the arrival of the kingdom of God as promised in the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis may be seen in the distinctively Lukan account of the commissioning of the 72 disciples (Lk 10:1-12), where Jesus instructs them to heal the sick in any city they enter and announce to the people there that the kingdom of God has come near to them (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The first three Gospels take up the OT understanding of God as the healer of his people and see this as fulfilled in Jesus. This fulfillment signifies the presence of God’s reign in the ministry of Jesus and points to him as the one through whom God is at work in the midst of his people.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel has only four healing incidents: the official’s son (Jn 4:46-54), the man ill for 38 years (5:1-18), the man born blind (ch 9), and the climactic raising of Lazarus (11:1-44). The special purpose and structure of this Gospel indicate that these incidents are carefully related to the accompanying discourses and are clearly intended as signs revealing the person of Jesus. The heightened emphasis on healings as revelatory signs in this Gospel confirms the similar intention in the first three Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsDonebytheApostles\">Healings Done by the Apostles<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of the Apostles tells of the continuation of Jesus’ ministry through the Spirit at work in his disciples. The primary focus in Acts is on proclamation, as 1:8 indicates. However, the healing of the lame beggar in Jerusalem indicates that the disciples were able to exercise the power of healing in the name of Jesus (3:1-16; 4:8-16). The healing is clearly intended to point to and glorify the person of Jesus and lead to faith in him (3:12-26). The balanced, twofold ministry of the disciples may be seen in the prayer of 4:29-30: “O Lord, hear their threats, and give your servants great boldness in their preaching. Send your healing power; may miraculous signs and wonders be done through the name of your holy servant Jesus” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of Philip in Samaria was devoted to proclaiming Christ (Acts 8:5) and healing the sick and those with unclean spirits (v 7). Peter heals Aeneas and raises Tabitha (9:34, 40), and in each case the effects are that many believe in the Lord (vv 35, 42). Paul is also described as preaching the gospel (17:2-3), healing (14:8-11; 28:8), casting out spirits (16:18), and raising a dead man (20:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsintheChurchAge\">Healings in the Church Age<\/p>\n<p>The letters of the NT say little about healing. First Corinthians speaks of the gifts of healing (1 Cor 12:9, 28). The implication is that such gifts are intended to be part of the ministry of the church, but the context indicates that not all are given such gifts (v 30) and that it is God who sovereignly distributes gifts for the good of the body. James indicates that a believer who is ill should request the church to pray for his healing (Jas 5:14-16; cf. Heb 12:13). The clear implication is that God is willing and able to minister to his people for healing today.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAL, HEALING To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal...","summary_en":"HEAL, HEALING To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19482,"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":19775,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jew","title_en":"Jew","content_ro":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","summary_en":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20211,"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":37623,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Travel","title_en":"Travel","content_ro":"<h3>TRAVEL<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinOldTestamentTimes\">Travel in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Several accounts depict the people of Israel moving over restricted areas to graze their flocks. Joseph’s brothers took their flocks from the south of the land up to Shechem and then to Dothan (Gn 37:12-17), but this was a mere 60 miles (96.5 kilometers). David traveled around Palestine and even went to Moab (1 Sm 22:3). The Danites moved from their home southwest of Jerusalem to the north, just south of the Lebanon Mountains (Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<p>Examples of travel for pasturage, migration, and protection could be multiplied. Such travelers would normally walk, though the ass was used both for riding and as a pack animal. The ox was employed for transporting heavy loads and sometimes for people (Gn 46:5). Later the camel came into general use (1 Kgs 10:2; 2 Kgs 8:9). Little is known of resting places for travelers in OT times. There are only a few references to a “lodging place” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malon<\/span>) in OT narratives (Gn 42:27; 43:21; Ex 4:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinNewTestamentTimes\">Travel in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman world knew a great deal of travel: to fulfill religious obligations at festival time, for trade, for government administration, for military purposes. Not the least among first-century travelers were the early Christian missionaries.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Roman peace and authority and the construction of well-made stone roads made travel relatively safe and quick. The modes of travel improved over that known in OT times. Long distances were traveled within the Roman Empire over good roads and in comparative safety. There were some hazards, however, notably in sea travel, from wind, storms, and pirates (Acts 15:39; 18:18-22; Rom 15:24-25; 2 Cor 11:25-26). Paul’s sea journey to Rome, for example, was perilous (Acts 27:1–28:14).<\/p>\n<p>The NT mentions a number of journeys on foot. Mary journeyed from Galilee to Judea to visit Elizabeth (Lk 1:39-40, 56). The baby Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the census (2:1-7); Jesus was brought to Jerusalem to comply with the Jewish purification law (v 22). Thus three trips were made from Nazareth to Jerusalem, a distance of about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers), from the time of Jesus’ conception to Mary’s purification. The annual Passover visit was made by Joseph and Mary (vv 41-51). Other journeys are mentioned (Jn 2:13; 5:1; 7:1-10; 12:1). Jesus himself walked to Jericho from Galilee (Mk 1:1-11) and also to the region of Tyre and Sidon (7:24). He was in Samaria more than once (Lk 17:11; Jn 4:4). His last journey to Jerusalem was via Jericho and up through the hills to Jerusalem (Mk 10:1, 46; 11:1). His last journey after the resurrection was to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\n<p>Paul traveled by sea on each of his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-14; 15:41–18:22; 18:23–21:17), generally accompanied by friends. He also made many journeys on foot in Palestine, Asia Minor, and the Greek peninsula. But not all travel was on foot in NT times. The ass, used for carrying loads, often carried people. Jesus once rode from Bethphage to Jerusalem, a short but highly symbolic journey (Mt 21:2-7; Mk 11:1-11; Jn 12:12-15). When Joseph traveled with his pregnant wife, Mary, to Bethlehem for the census at the time of Jesus’ birth, Mary probably rode on an ass. The Ethiopian eunuch was riding in a chariot after worshiping at Jerusalem and was joined by Philip traveling on foot (Acts 8:26-38). Roman soldiers both marched and made wide use of horses. When Paul was brought to Caesarea from Jerusalem, mounts were prepared for him (23:23-24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandSeaLanes\">Roads and Sea Lanes<\/p>\n<p>The roads of biblical times figured prominently in the geography, topography, and history of Palestine—a land that served as a bridge between Egypt and centers of civilization and trade in the Middle East. Many of the roads were strategically important, both commercially and militarily. Some roads gained significance as pilgrim routes to facilitate travel to religious centers like Jerusalem. Roads in biblical times were of three main types: long-distance international roads, medium-distance intraregional roads, and a variety of roads inside each region or state.<\/p>\n<h5>Great International Roads<\/h5>\n<p>These linked the Mediterranean coast to the northern Tigris Valley and southern Mesopotamia. Some linked Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, while others led south to Egypt, either along the coast or east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and across the Sinai Peninsula. There were trade routes between Anatolia and Assyria early in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Apparently the military campaign referred to in Genesis 14 aimed to secure the great trade route, the King’s Highway, from northern Mesopotamia to Egypt. Military invaders and travelers from Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia would head across the hinterlands of Syria toward the coast before turning south into Palestine and Egypt. The advent of European powers, Greece and Rome, into the Middle East opened up another vast network of international roads for the peoples of the East. Until Roman times, these roads were not surfaced with stone but were cleared pathways. They were very rough, ungraded, and in wet weather, impassable in many places. But they were evidently well defined by “waymarks” and “guideposts” (Jer 31:21). With the coming of the Romans, important roads were built with deep foundations and with large blocks of flat stone at the surface. The remains of these roads are still seen in many places in the Middle East and in Europe. Distance markers or milestones were regularly placed along the roads.<\/p>\n<h5>International North-South Roads in Palestine<\/h5>\n<p>The roads that linked countries to the north with Egypt passed through Palestine, a natural land bridge. There were three major roads. The coastal road began in Damascus and passed via Hazor across the plain of Esdraelon, through the Megiddo Pass, down the coast past Gaza and into Egypt. This was probably “the way of the sea” (Is 9:1). The Sinai road led from Egypt into the southern Negev and then to Kadesh-barnea, Beersheba, Hebron, Jerusalem, Shechem, Acco, Tyre, and Sidon. The Red Sea road entered the Palestine area from the Gulf of Aqaba, where the ancient port of Elath and Solomon’s port of Ezion-geber stood (Nm 33:35; 2 Chr 8:17). From there it led through the mountainous areas of Transjordan, crossing the deep wadis and then north through the Hauran region to Damascus. This was the road taken by caravans from southern Arabia to Damascus, the ancient King’s Highway (Nm 20:17; 21:22).<\/p>\n<p>There were other north-south roads of lesser importance. One coastal road led from Joppa via Caesarea and Dor to Acco, where it linked with the Sinai road. Evidently it was not very significant until Roman times, when the port of Caesarea was built. The marshes in the plain of Sharon posed many problems. The plain of Esdraelon was also marshy and interrupted the roads north in bad seasons. A raised road across the swampy sections was eventually constructed. Another road led north from Hazor, branching off the main trunk road to Damascus. The Jordan Valley road skirted the southwestern part of Galilee and led down the Jordan Valley to Jericho.<\/p>\n<h5>East-West Roads<\/h5>\n<p>Several important roads ran east-west, intersecting the larger roads leading north. One such road led from Gaza to Beersheba and then down the Arabah, with an offshoot to Petra. Another led from Ashkelon, via Gath, to Hebron and on to En-gedi on the Dead Sea. Another road led from Joppa east up the valley of Aijalon (Jos 10:6-14) to Bethel and on to Jericho. One well-used road led from Joppa to Shechem, across the Jordan at Adam (3:16) and into Gilead in Transjordan. Other roads led from Acco eastward to Galilee and also up the coast to Tyre and Sidon. There were, indeed, numerous east-west roads that provided contact between various parts of Palestine. In Roman times, when the speedy movement of armies was essential, some of the old roads were greatly improved and new ones built.<\/p>\n<h5>Sea Lanes<\/h5>\n<p>The people of Israel, unlike the Phoenicians, seldom used the sea lanes. When Solomon planned to send ships down the Red Sea to Ophir (1 Kgs 9:26-28), he used Phoenician seamen. Jehoshaphat planned a similar expedition, but his ships were wrecked (22:48-49). Coastal traffic in OT times was in the hands of Philistines and Phoenicians. There were several ports along the Mediterranean Sea coast, such as Gaza, Joppa, Dor, and Acco, but none was very good. There were also sea lanes linking the Mediterranean coast with Egypt and distant Tarshish (probably Spain). The other coastal water was the Gulf of Aqaba with its two ports—Ezion-geber for Transjordan, and Elath for west of the Jordan. Solomon’s fleet used Ezion-geber as its home port.<\/p>\n\n<p>In NT times things changed considerably. The Middle East produced commodities used by peoples farther west, especially the Romans. Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria handled both cargo and travelers. Smaller ports like those in Palestine and many others around the coast of Asia Minor provided a haven for ships. One ingenious scheme to avoid a 200-mile (321.8-kilometer) journey around the Greek peninsula was to drag small boats across the five-mile- (8-kilometer-) wide isthmus at Corinth. Even the largest ship in NT times was in danger from wind and storm at sea (Acts 27), so sea travel was undertaken preferably when the risk of storms was minimal, roughly from November to March. There was a lot of sea traffic in the Mediterranean Sea at appropriate seasons, largely for trade. Grain ships crossed regularly from Rome to Egypt and to the east.<\/p>\n<p>Ships were driven by sail power supplemented as necessary by oars operated by slaves. Some indication of the size of ships comes from the discovery of ancient wrecks and from Latin and Greek literature. An old dry dock 130 feet (39.6 meters) long found near Athens was once used for Greek war vessels, which were smaller than the cargo vessels. The Roman writer Lucian refers to an Alexandrian grain ship 180 feet (54.9 meters) long, suggesting a capacity of about 1,200 tons (1,088.6 metric tons). Paul’s ship carried 276 persons (Acts 27:37). Modern underwater archaeology is providing valuable information about these ancient ships.<\/p>\n<h5>Reasons for Travel<\/h5>\n<p>The most important reason for travel in NT times was for trade and commerce, which involved far more than merely transporting goods. There were agents, supervisors, insurers of cargo, bankers, and a whole range of people involved in the acquisition and safe delivery of the cargo.<\/p>\n<p>Military travel was considerable. A wide variety of tasks had to be undertaken in the way of reconnaissance, procuring of supplies, forward arrangements for the bivouacking of troops, and the transport of both troops and equipment.<\/p>\n<p>Some travelers were tradespeople changing their place of employment, like Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2-3). Aquila had traveled from Pontus on the Black Sea to Rome and then, in a time of persecution, he had fled to Corinth with his wife. Many others traveled for similar reasons.<\/p>\n<p>People on religious pilgrimage traveled by land or sea. Jews from many lands journeyed to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivities (cf. Acts 2:5-11). Non-Jews went to religious centers at Ephesus, Athens, and Eleusis, where there were important temples. Many minor temples also attracted pilgrims. The construction of new temples and a variety of government administration buildings brought craftsmen from afar. Often the materials used in construction had to be transported to the site. Some people made trips for health reasons to temples famed for healing miracles or to enjoy the benefits of hot springs like those at Capernaum or Tiberias. Athletes traveled to centers for important contests like the Olympic games, and crowds of people flocked to witness the spectacle. Some travelers were students or teachers going to great centers of learning—the universities of those times. Yet others traveled as official emissaries bearing important government and commercial documents. Despite all this activity, vast numbers of ordinary citizens hardly ever traveled more than a few miles from their homes.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRAVEL<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinOldTestamentTimes\">Travel in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Several accounts depict the people of Israel moving over restricted areas to graze their flocks. Joseph’s brothers took their flocks from the south of the land up to Shechem and then to Dothan (Gn 37:12-17), but this was a mere 60 miles (96.5 kilometers). David traveled around Palestine and even went to Moab (1 Sm 22:3). The Danites moved from their home southwest of Jerusalem to the north, just south of the Lebanon Mountains (Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<p>Examples of travel for pasturage, migration, and protection could be multiplied. Such travelers would normally walk, though the ass was used both for riding and as a pack animal. The ox was employed for transporting heavy loads and sometimes for people (Gn 46:5). Later the camel came into general use (1 Kgs 10:2; 2 Kgs 8:9). Little is known of resting places for travelers in OT times. There are only a few references to a “lodging place” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malon<\/span>) in OT narratives (Gn 42:27; 43:21; Ex 4:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinNewTestamentTimes\">Travel in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman world knew a great deal of travel: to fulfill religious obligations at festival time, for trade, for government administration, for military purposes. Not the least among first-century travelers were the early Christian missionaries.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Roman peace and authority and the construction of well-made stone roads made travel relatively safe and quick. The modes of travel improved over that known in OT times. Long distances were traveled within the Roman Empire over good roads and in comparative safety. There were some hazards, however, notably in sea travel, from wind, storms, and pirates (Acts 15:39; 18:18-22; Rom 15:24-25; 2 Cor 11:25-26). Paul’s sea journey to Rome, for example, was perilous (Acts 27:1–28:14).<\/p>\n<p>The NT mentions a number of journeys on foot. Mary journeyed from Galilee to Judea to visit Elizabeth (Lk 1:39-40, 56). The baby Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the census (2:1-7); Jesus was brought to Jerusalem to comply with the Jewish purification law (v 22). Thus three trips were made from Nazareth to Jerusalem, a distance of about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers), from the time of Jesus’ conception to Mary’s purification. The annual Passover visit was made by Joseph and Mary (vv 41-51). Other journeys are mentioned (Jn 2:13; 5:1; 7:1-10; 12:1). Jesus himself walked to Jericho from Galilee (Mk 1:1-11) and also to the region of Tyre and Sidon (7:24). He was in Samaria more than once (Lk 17:11; Jn 4:4). His last journey to Jerusalem was via Jericho and up through the hills to Jerusalem (Mk 10:1, 46; 11:1). His last journey after the resurrection was to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\n<p>Paul traveled by sea on each of his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-14; 15:41–18:22; 18:23–21:17), generally accompanied by friends. He also made many journeys on foot in Palestine, Asia Minor, and the Greek peninsula. But not all travel was on foot in NT times. The ass, used for carrying loads, often carried people. Jesus once rode from Bethphage to Jerusalem, a short but highly symbolic journey (Mt 21:2-7; Mk 11:1-11; Jn 12:12-15). When Joseph traveled with his pregnant wife, Mary, to Bethlehem for the census at the time of Jesus’ birth, Mary probably rode on an ass. The Ethiopian eunuch was riding in a chariot after worshiping at Jerusalem and was joined by Philip traveling on foot (Acts 8:26-38). Roman soldiers both marched and made wide use of horses. When Paul was brought to Caesarea from Jerusalem, mounts were prepared for him (23:23-24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandSeaLanes\">Roads and Sea Lanes<\/p>\n<p>The roads of biblical times figured prominently in the geography, topography, and history of Palestine—a land that served as a bridge between Egypt and centers of civilization and trade in the Middle East. Many of the roads were strategically important, both commercially and militarily. Some roads gained significance as pilgrim routes to facilitate travel to religious centers like Jerusalem. Roads in biblical times were of three main types: long-distance international roads, medium-distance intraregional roads, and a variety of roads inside each region or state.<\/p>\n<h5>Great International Roads<\/h5>\n<p>These linked the Mediterranean coast to the northern Tigris Valley and southern Mesopotamia. Some linked Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, while others led south to Egypt, either along the coast or east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and across the Sinai Peninsula. There were trade routes between Anatolia and Assyria early in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Apparently the military campaign referred to in Genesis 14 aimed to secure the great trade route, the King’s Highway, from northern Mesopotamia to Egypt. Military invaders and travelers from Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia would head across the hinterlands of Syria toward the coast before turning south into Palestine and Egypt. The advent of European powers, Greece and Rome, into the Middle East opened up another vast network of international roads for the peoples of the East. Until Roman times, these roads were not surfaced with stone but were cleared pathways. They were very rough, ungraded, and in wet weather, impassable in many places. But they were evidently well defined by “waymarks” and “guideposts” (Jer 31:21). With the coming of the Romans, important roads were built with deep foundations and with large blocks of flat stone at the surface. The remains of these roads are still seen in many places in the Middle East and in Europe. Distance markers or milestones were regularly placed along the roads.<\/p>\n<h5>International North-South Roads in Palestine<\/h5>\n<p>The roads that linked countries to the north with Egypt passed through Palestine, a natural land bridge. There were three major roads. The coastal road began in Damascus and passed via Hazor across the plain of Esdraelon, through the Megiddo Pass, down the coast past Gaza and into Egypt. This was probably “the way of the sea” (Is 9:1). The Sinai road led from Egypt into the southern Negev and then to Kadesh-barnea, Beersheba, Hebron, Jerusalem, Shechem, Acco, Tyre, and Sidon. The Red Sea road entered the Palestine area from the Gulf of Aqaba, where the ancient port of Elath and Solomon’s port of Ezion-geber stood (Nm 33:35; 2 Chr 8:17). From there it led through the mountainous areas of Transjordan, crossing the deep wadis and then north through the Hauran region to Damascus. This was the road taken by caravans from southern Arabia to Damascus, the ancient King’s Highway (Nm 20:17; 21:22).<\/p>\n<p>There were other north-south roads of lesser importance. One coastal road led from Joppa via Caesarea and Dor to Acco, where it linked with the Sinai road. Evidently it was not very significant until Roman times, when the port of Caesarea was built. The marshes in the plain of Sharon posed many problems. The plain of Esdraelon was also marshy and interrupted the roads north in bad seasons. A raised road across the swampy sections was eventually constructed. Another road led north from Hazor, branching off the main trunk road to Damascus. The Jordan Valley road skirted the southwestern part of Galilee and led down the Jordan Valley to Jericho.<\/p>\n<h5>East-West Roads<\/h5>\n<p>Several important roads ran east-west, intersecting the larger roads leading north. One such road led from Gaza to Beersheba and then down the Arabah, with an offshoot to Petra. Another led from Ashkelon, via Gath, to Hebron and on to En-gedi on the Dead Sea. Another road led from Joppa east up the valley of Aijalon (Jos 10:6-14) to Bethel and on to Jericho. One well-used road led from Joppa to Shechem, across the Jordan at Adam (3:16) and into Gilead in Transjordan. Other roads led from Acco eastward to Galilee and also up the coast to Tyre and Sidon. There were, indeed, numerous east-west roads that provided contact between various parts of Palestine. In Roman times, when the speedy movement of armies was essential, some of the old roads were greatly improved and new ones built.<\/p>\n<h5>Sea Lanes<\/h5>\n<p>The people of Israel, unlike the Phoenicians, seldom used the sea lanes. When Solomon planned to send ships down the Red Sea to Ophir (1 Kgs 9:26-28), he used Phoenician seamen. Jehoshaphat planned a similar expedition, but his ships were wrecked (22:48-49). Coastal traffic in OT times was in the hands of Philistines and Phoenicians. There were several ports along the Mediterranean Sea coast, such as Gaza, Joppa, Dor, and Acco, but none was very good. There were also sea lanes linking the Mediterranean coast with Egypt and distant Tarshish (probably Spain). The other coastal water was the Gulf of Aqaba with its two ports—Ezion-geber for Transjordan, and Elath for west of the Jordan. Solomon’s fleet used Ezion-geber as its home port.<\/p>\n\n<p>In NT times things changed considerably. The Middle East produced commodities used by peoples farther west, especially the Romans. Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria handled both cargo and travelers. Smaller ports like those in Palestine and many others around the coast of Asia Minor provided a haven for ships. One ingenious scheme to avoid a 200-mile (321.8-kilometer) journey around the Greek peninsula was to drag small boats across the five-mile- (8-kilometer-) wide isthmus at Corinth. Even the largest ship in NT times was in danger from wind and storm at sea (Acts 27), so sea travel was undertaken preferably when the risk of storms was minimal, roughly from November to March. There was a lot of sea traffic in the Mediterranean Sea at appropriate seasons, largely for trade. Grain ships crossed regularly from Rome to Egypt and to the east.<\/p>\n<p>Ships were driven by sail power supplemented as necessary by oars operated by slaves. Some indication of the size of ships comes from the discovery of ancient wrecks and from Latin and Greek literature. An old dry dock 130 feet (39.6 meters) long found near Athens was once used for Greek war vessels, which were smaller than the cargo vessels. The Roman writer Lucian refers to an Alexandrian grain ship 180 feet (54.9 meters) long, suggesting a capacity of about 1,200 tons (1,088.6 metric tons). Paul’s ship carried 276 persons (Acts 27:37). Modern underwater archaeology is providing valuable information about these ancient ships.<\/p>\n<h5>Reasons for Travel<\/h5>\n<p>The most important reason for travel in NT times was for trade and commerce, which involved far more than merely transporting goods. There were agents, supervisors, insurers of cargo, bankers, and a whole range of people involved in the acquisition and safe delivery of the cargo.<\/p>\n<p>Military travel was considerable. A wide variety of tasks had to be undertaken in the way of reconnaissance, procuring of supplies, forward arrangements for the bivouacking of troops, and the transport of both troops and equipment.<\/p>\n<p>Some travelers were tradespeople changing their place of employment, like Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2-3). Aquila had traveled from Pontus on the Black Sea to Rome and then, in a time of persecution, he had fled to Corinth with his wife. Many others traveled for similar reasons.<\/p>\n<p>People on religious pilgrimage traveled by land or sea. Jews from many lands journeyed to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivities (cf. Acts 2:5-11). Non-Jews went to religious centers at Ephesus, Athens, and Eleusis, where there were important temples. Many minor temples also attracted pilgrims. The construction of new temples and a variety of government administration buildings brought craftsmen from afar. Often the materials used in construction had to be transported to the site. Some people made trips for health reasons to temples famed for healing miracles or to enjoy the benefits of hot springs like those at Capernaum or Tiberias. Athletes traveled to centers for important contests like the Olympic games, and crowds of people flocked to witness the spectacle. Some travelers were students or teachers going to great centers of learning—the universities of those times. Yet others traveled as official emissaries bearing important government and commercial documents. Despite all this activity, vast numbers of ordinary citizens hardly ever traveled more than a few miles from their homes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRAVEL In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine. Travel in Old Testament Times Several accounts depict the peop...","summary_en":"TRAVEL In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine. Travel in Old Testament Times Several accounts depict the peop...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56401,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1–10:42<\/strong> In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1–10:42<\/strong> In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1–10:42 In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.","summary_en":"5:1–10:42 In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56402,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1-40<\/strong> This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1-40<\/strong> This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-40 This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).","summary_en":"5:1-40 This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56403,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>one of the Jewish holy days:<\/em> Because Jesus <em>returned to Jerusalem<\/em> for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>one of the Jewish holy days:<\/em> Because Jesus <em>returned to Jerusalem<\/em> for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1 one of the Jewish holy days: Because Jesus returned to Jerusalem for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.","summary_en":"5:1 one of the Jewish holy days: Because Jesus returned to Jerusalem for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84027,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1–10:42<\/strong> In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1–10:42<\/strong> In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1–10:42 In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.","summary_en":"5:1–10:42 In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84028,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1-40<\/strong> This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1-40<\/strong> This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-40 This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).","summary_en":"5:1-40 This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84029,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>one of the Jewish holy days:<\/em> Because Jesus <em>returned to Jerusalem<\/em> for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>one of the Jewish holy days:<\/em> Because Jesus <em>returned to Jerusalem<\/em> for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1 one of the Jewish holy days: Because Jesus returned to Jerusalem for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.","summary_en":"5:1 one of the Jewish holy days: Because Jesus returned to Jerusalem for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111653,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1–10:42<\/strong> In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1–10:42<\/strong> In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1–10:42 In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.","summary_en":"5:1–10:42 In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111654,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1-40<\/strong> This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1-40<\/strong> This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-40 This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).","summary_en":"5:1-40 This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111655,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>one of the Jewish holy days:<\/em> Because Jesus <em>returned to Jerusalem<\/em> for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>one of the Jewish holy days:<\/em> Because Jesus <em>returned to Jerusalem<\/em> for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1 one of the Jewish holy days: Because Jesus returned to Jerusalem for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.","summary_en":"5:1 one of the Jewish holy days: Because Jesus returned to Jerusalem for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139279,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1–10:42<\/strong> In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1–10:42<\/strong> In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1–10:42 In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.","summary_en":"5:1–10:42 In this section Jesus appears at a series of Jewish festivals and uses their imagery to reveal more profound truths about himself. He appears at a Sabbath (ch 5), Passover (ch 6), the Festival of Shelters (chs 7–9), and Hanukkah (ch 10). In each case, Jesus himself replaces some vital element in the ceremonies of the festival.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139280,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1-40<\/strong> This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1-40<\/strong> This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-40 This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).","summary_en":"5:1-40 This chapter reads like a courtroom drama, with a description of the crime (5:1-15), followed by a decision to prosecute (5:16), a description of the charges (5:18), and Jesus’ defense (5:17, 19-40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139281,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>one of the Jewish holy days:<\/em> Because Jesus <em>returned to Jerusalem<\/em> for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>one of the Jewish holy days:<\/em> Because Jesus <em>returned to Jerusalem<\/em> for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1 one of the Jewish holy days: Because Jesus returned to Jerusalem for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.","summary_en":"5:1 one of the Jewish holy days: Because Jesus returned to Jerusalem for the celebration, it was probably one of the three pilgrimage festivals of Judaism (see Exod 23:14-17; Deut 16:16). These festivals lasted one week.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62321,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purim","title_en":"Purim","content_ro":"<h3>Purim<\/h3>\n<p>The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means <em>lots<\/em> or <em>dice<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">purim<\/span>, derived from Akkadian <em>puru<\/em>). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast <em>purim<\/em> to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object with a number engraved on each side. A similar die inscribed with the word <em>pur<\/em> dates to the 800s <span>BC<\/span>. In the book of Esther, the Persian astrologers used <em>purim<\/em> to establish the best time to slaughter the Jews (Esth 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>On the fateful day—March 7, 473 <span>BC<\/span>—God miraculously rescued his people from certain death, just as he had rescued the nation from Egypt at the Passover. Mordecai and Esther therefore formalized an annual celebration of God’s rescue so that all future generations would remember what God had accomplished (9:28). The festival was widely celebrated thereafter among Jews (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:36; Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.6.13; perhaps John 5:1).<\/p>\n<p>When God rescued his chosen people, the day for Jewish execution turned into a day of holy vengeance and was followed by a day of celebration. Today, Jewish people fast and pray to commemorate Esther’s fasting. This fast is then followed by Purim, which is celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month of Adar (occurring in February or March). On this joyous holiday Jews read Esther (with loud <em>boo<\/em>s for Haman and <em>hooray<\/em>s for Mordecai) and have a time of feasting and rejoicing, with gifts for friends and for the poor. It is a celebration of how God providentially worked to care for his people so that they were not exterminated (9:1-17) and of how God continues to care for, provide for, and save his people (see also Gen 45:5; Ps 91; Prov 16:9, 33; Dan 2:21; Acts 1:6-7; 2:22-23; 4:28-30; 17:24-27; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Esth 9:1-32; Pss 37:23; 91:1-16; Prov 16:9, 33; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purim<\/h3>\n<p>The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means <em>lots<\/em> or <em>dice<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">purim<\/span>, derived from Akkadian <em>puru<\/em>). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast <em>purim<\/em> to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object with a number engraved on each side. A similar die inscribed with the word <em>pur<\/em> dates to the 800s <span>BC<\/span>. In the book of Esther, the Persian astrologers used <em>purim<\/em> to establish the best time to slaughter the Jews (Esth 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>On the fateful day—March 7, 473 <span>BC<\/span>—God miraculously rescued his people from certain death, just as he had rescued the nation from Egypt at the Passover. Mordecai and Esther therefore formalized an annual celebration of God’s rescue so that all future generations would remember what God had accomplished (9:28). The festival was widely celebrated thereafter among Jews (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:36; Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.6.13; perhaps John 5:1).<\/p>\n<p>When God rescued his chosen people, the day for Jewish execution turned into a day of holy vengeance and was followed by a day of celebration. Today, Jewish people fast and pray to commemorate Esther’s fasting. This fast is then followed by Purim, which is celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month of Adar (occurring in February or March). On this joyous holiday Jews read Esther (with loud <em>boo<\/em>s for Haman and <em>hooray<\/em>s for Mordecai) and have a time of feasting and rejoicing, with gifts for friends and for the poor. It is a celebration of how God providentially worked to care for his people so that they were not exterminated (9:1-17) and of how God continues to care for, provide for, and save his people (see also Gen 45:5; Ps 91; Prov 16:9, 33; Dan 2:21; Acts 1:6-7; 2:22-23; 4:28-30; 17:24-27; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Esth 9:1-32; Pss 37:23; 91:1-16; Prov 16:9, 33; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purim The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means lots or dice (Hebrew purim, derived from Akkadian puru). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast purim to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object...","summary_en":"Purim The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means lots or dice (Hebrew purim, derived from Akkadian puru). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast purim to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65816,"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":89947,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purim","title_en":"Purim","content_ro":"<h3>Purim<\/h3>\n<p>The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means <em>lots<\/em> or <em>dice<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">purim<\/span>, derived from Akkadian <em>puru<\/em>). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast <em>purim<\/em> to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object with a number engraved on each side. A similar die inscribed with the word <em>pur<\/em> dates to the 800s <span>BC<\/span>. In the book of Esther, the Persian astrologers used <em>purim<\/em> to establish the best time to slaughter the Jews (Esth 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>On the fateful day—March 7, 473 <span>BC<\/span>—God miraculously rescued his people from certain death, just as he had rescued the nation from Egypt at the Passover. Mordecai and Esther therefore formalized an annual celebration of God’s rescue so that all future generations would remember what God had accomplished (9:28). The festival was widely celebrated thereafter among Jews (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:36; Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.6.13; perhaps John 5:1).<\/p>\n<p>When God rescued his chosen people, the day for Jewish execution turned into a day of holy vengeance and was followed by a day of celebration. Today, Jewish people fast and pray to commemorate Esther’s fasting. This fast is then followed by Purim, which is celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month of Adar (occurring in February or March). On this joyous holiday Jews read Esther (with loud <em>boo<\/em>s for Haman and <em>hooray<\/em>s for Mordecai) and have a time of feasting and rejoicing, with gifts for friends and for the poor. It is a celebration of how God providentially worked to care for his people so that they were not exterminated (9:1-17) and of how God continues to care for, provide for, and save his people (see also Gen 45:5; Ps 91; Prov 16:9, 33; Dan 2:21; Acts 1:6-7; 2:22-23; 4:28-30; 17:24-27; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Esth 9:1-32; Pss 37:23; 91:1-16; Prov 16:9, 33; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purim<\/h3>\n<p>The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means <em>lots<\/em> or <em>dice<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">purim<\/span>, derived from Akkadian <em>puru<\/em>). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast <em>purim<\/em> to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object with a number engraved on each side. A similar die inscribed with the word <em>pur<\/em> dates to the 800s <span>BC<\/span>. In the book of Esther, the Persian astrologers used <em>purim<\/em> to establish the best time to slaughter the Jews (Esth 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>On the fateful day—March 7, 473 <span>BC<\/span>—God miraculously rescued his people from certain death, just as he had rescued the nation from Egypt at the Passover. Mordecai and Esther therefore formalized an annual celebration of God’s rescue so that all future generations would remember what God had accomplished (9:28). The festival was widely celebrated thereafter among Jews (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:36; Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.6.13; perhaps John 5:1).<\/p>\n<p>When God rescued his chosen people, the day for Jewish execution turned into a day of holy vengeance and was followed by a day of celebration. Today, Jewish people fast and pray to commemorate Esther’s fasting. This fast is then followed by Purim, which is celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month of Adar (occurring in February or March). On this joyous holiday Jews read Esther (with loud <em>boo<\/em>s for Haman and <em>hooray<\/em>s for Mordecai) and have a time of feasting and rejoicing, with gifts for friends and for the poor. It is a celebration of how God providentially worked to care for his people so that they were not exterminated (9:1-17) and of how God continues to care for, provide for, and save his people (see also Gen 45:5; Ps 91; Prov 16:9, 33; Dan 2:21; Acts 1:6-7; 2:22-23; 4:28-30; 17:24-27; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Esth 9:1-32; Pss 37:23; 91:1-16; Prov 16:9, 33; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purim The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means lots or dice (Hebrew purim, derived from Akkadian puru). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast purim to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object...","summary_en":"Purim The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means lots or dice (Hebrew purim, derived from Akkadian puru). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast purim to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93442,"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":117573,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purim","title_en":"Purim","content_ro":"<h3>Purim<\/h3>\n<p>The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means <em>lots<\/em> or <em>dice<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">purim<\/span>, derived from Akkadian <em>puru<\/em>). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast <em>purim<\/em> to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object with a number engraved on each side. A similar die inscribed with the word <em>pur<\/em> dates to the 800s <span>BC<\/span>. In the book of Esther, the Persian astrologers used <em>purim<\/em> to establish the best time to slaughter the Jews (Esth 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>On the fateful day—March 7, 473 <span>BC<\/span>—God miraculously rescued his people from certain death, just as he had rescued the nation from Egypt at the Passover. Mordecai and Esther therefore formalized an annual celebration of God’s rescue so that all future generations would remember what God had accomplished (9:28). The festival was widely celebrated thereafter among Jews (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:36; Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.6.13; perhaps John 5:1).<\/p>\n<p>When God rescued his chosen people, the day for Jewish execution turned into a day of holy vengeance and was followed by a day of celebration. Today, Jewish people fast and pray to commemorate Esther’s fasting. This fast is then followed by Purim, which is celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month of Adar (occurring in February or March). On this joyous holiday Jews read Esther (with loud <em>boo<\/em>s for Haman and <em>hooray<\/em>s for Mordecai) and have a time of feasting and rejoicing, with gifts for friends and for the poor. It is a celebration of how God providentially worked to care for his people so that they were not exterminated (9:1-17) and of how God continues to care for, provide for, and save his people (see also Gen 45:5; Ps 91; Prov 16:9, 33; Dan 2:21; Acts 1:6-7; 2:22-23; 4:28-30; 17:24-27; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Esth 9:1-32; Pss 37:23; 91:1-16; Prov 16:9, 33; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purim<\/h3>\n<p>The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means <em>lots<\/em> or <em>dice<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">purim<\/span>, derived from Akkadian <em>puru<\/em>). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast <em>purim<\/em> to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object with a number engraved on each side. A similar die inscribed with the word <em>pur<\/em> dates to the 800s <span>BC<\/span>. In the book of Esther, the Persian astrologers used <em>purim<\/em> to establish the best time to slaughter the Jews (Esth 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>On the fateful day—March 7, 473 <span>BC<\/span>—God miraculously rescued his people from certain death, just as he had rescued the nation from Egypt at the Passover. Mordecai and Esther therefore formalized an annual celebration of God’s rescue so that all future generations would remember what God had accomplished (9:28). The festival was widely celebrated thereafter among Jews (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:36; Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.6.13; perhaps John 5:1).<\/p>\n<p>When God rescued his chosen people, the day for Jewish execution turned into a day of holy vengeance and was followed by a day of celebration. Today, Jewish people fast and pray to commemorate Esther’s fasting. This fast is then followed by Purim, which is celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month of Adar (occurring in February or March). On this joyous holiday Jews read Esther (with loud <em>boo<\/em>s for Haman and <em>hooray<\/em>s for Mordecai) and have a time of feasting and rejoicing, with gifts for friends and for the poor. It is a celebration of how God providentially worked to care for his people so that they were not exterminated (9:1-17) and of how God continues to care for, provide for, and save his people (see also Gen 45:5; Ps 91; Prov 16:9, 33; Dan 2:21; Acts 1:6-7; 2:22-23; 4:28-30; 17:24-27; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Esth 9:1-32; Pss 37:23; 91:1-16; Prov 16:9, 33; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purim The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means lots or dice (Hebrew purim, derived from Akkadian puru). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast purim to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object...","summary_en":"Purim The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means lots or dice (Hebrew purim, derived from Akkadian puru). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast purim to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121068,"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":145199,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purim","title_en":"Purim","content_ro":"<h3>Purim<\/h3>\n<p>The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means <em>lots<\/em> or <em>dice<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">purim<\/span>, derived from Akkadian <em>puru<\/em>). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast <em>purim<\/em> to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object with a number engraved on each side. A similar die inscribed with the word <em>pur<\/em> dates to the 800s <span>BC<\/span>. In the book of Esther, the Persian astrologers used <em>purim<\/em> to establish the best time to slaughter the Jews (Esth 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>On the fateful day—March 7, 473 <span>BC<\/span>—God miraculously rescued his people from certain death, just as he had rescued the nation from Egypt at the Passover. Mordecai and Esther therefore formalized an annual celebration of God’s rescue so that all future generations would remember what God had accomplished (9:28). The festival was widely celebrated thereafter among Jews (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:36; Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.6.13; perhaps John 5:1).<\/p>\n<p>When God rescued his chosen people, the day for Jewish execution turned into a day of holy vengeance and was followed by a day of celebration. Today, Jewish people fast and pray to commemorate Esther’s fasting. This fast is then followed by Purim, which is celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month of Adar (occurring in February or March). On this joyous holiday Jews read Esther (with loud <em>boo<\/em>s for Haman and <em>hooray<\/em>s for Mordecai) and have a time of feasting and rejoicing, with gifts for friends and for the poor. It is a celebration of how God providentially worked to care for his people so that they were not exterminated (9:1-17) and of how God continues to care for, provide for, and save his people (see also Gen 45:5; Ps 91; Prov 16:9, 33; Dan 2:21; Acts 1:6-7; 2:22-23; 4:28-30; 17:24-27; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Esth 9:1-32; Pss 37:23; 91:1-16; Prov 16:9, 33; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purim<\/h3>\n<p>The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means <em>lots<\/em> or <em>dice<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">purim<\/span>, derived from Akkadian <em>puru<\/em>). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast <em>purim<\/em> to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object with a number engraved on each side. A similar die inscribed with the word <em>pur<\/em> dates to the 800s <span>BC<\/span>. In the book of Esther, the Persian astrologers used <em>purim<\/em> to establish the best time to slaughter the Jews (Esth 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>On the fateful day—March 7, 473 <span>BC<\/span>—God miraculously rescued his people from certain death, just as he had rescued the nation from Egypt at the Passover. Mordecai and Esther therefore formalized an annual celebration of God’s rescue so that all future generations would remember what God had accomplished (9:28). The festival was widely celebrated thereafter among Jews (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:36; Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.6.13; perhaps John 5:1).<\/p>\n<p>When God rescued his chosen people, the day for Jewish execution turned into a day of holy vengeance and was followed by a day of celebration. Today, Jewish people fast and pray to commemorate Esther’s fasting. This fast is then followed by Purim, which is celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month of Adar (occurring in February or March). On this joyous holiday Jews read Esther (with loud <em>boo<\/em>s for Haman and <em>hooray<\/em>s for Mordecai) and have a time of feasting and rejoicing, with gifts for friends and for the poor. It is a celebration of how God providentially worked to care for his people so that they were not exterminated (9:1-17) and of how God continues to care for, provide for, and save his people (see also Gen 45:5; Ps 91; Prov 16:9, 33; Dan 2:21; Acts 1:6-7; 2:22-23; 4:28-30; 17:24-27; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Esth 9:1-32; Pss 37:23; 91:1-16; Prov 16:9, 33; Rom 8:28; 1 Pet 3:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purim The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means lots or dice (Hebrew purim, derived from Akkadian puru). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast purim to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object...","summary_en":"Purim The Festival of Purim is the only Old Testament festival not established during the time of Moses. Its name is derived from a word that means lots or dice (Hebrew purim, derived from Akkadian puru). It was a common practice in the ancient world to cast purim to determine whether God favored a particular course of action: A good number would indicate God’s approval, a bad number his disapproval. Near the king’s throne room at Susa in Persia, archaeologists found a small four-sided object...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148694,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":2510,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Aramaic","title_en":"Aramaic","content_ro":"<h3>ARAMAIC<\/h3>\n<p>One of the three original languages of the Bible, found in sections of the book of Daniel (2:4b–7:28) and Ezra (4:8–6:18; 7:12-26). Aramaic phrases and expressions also appear in Genesis (31:47), Jeremiah (10:11), and the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentUse\">Old Testament Use<\/p>\n<p>Aramaic is linguistically very close to Hebrew and similar in structure. Aramaic texts in the Bible are written in the same script as Hebrew. In contrast to Hebrew, Aramaic uses a larger vocabulary, including many loan words, and a greater variety of connectives. It also contains an elaborate system of tenses, developed through the use of participles with pronouns or with various forms of the verb “to be.” Although Aramaic is less euphonious and poetical than Hebrew, it is probably superior as a vehicle of exact expression.<\/p>\n<p>Aramaic has perhaps the longest continuous living history of any language known. It was used during the Bible’s patriarchal period and is still spoken by a few people today. Aramaic and its cognate, Syriac, evolved into many dialects in different places and periods. Characterized by simplicity, clarity, and precision, it adapted easily to the various needs of everyday life. It could serve equally well as a language for scholars, pupils, lawyers, or merchants. Some have described it as the Semitic equivalent of English.<\/p>\n<p>The origin of Aramaic is unknown, but it seems to have been closely related to Amorite and possibly to other ancient northwest Semitic dialects barely known to scholars. Although an Aramean kingdom as such never really existed, various Aramean “states” developed into influential centers. A few short Aramean inscriptions from that era (10th to 8th centuries <span>BC<\/span>) have been found and studied.<\/p>\n<p>By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, King Hezekiah’s representatives requested the spokesmen of the Assyrian king Sennacherib to “speak to your servants in Aramaic, since we understand it. Don’t speak to us in Hebrew in the hearing of the people on the wall” (2 Kgs 18:26, <span>niv<\/span>). By the Persian period, Aramaic had become the language of international trade. During their captivity, the Jews probably adopted it for convenience—certainly in commerce—while Hebrew became confined to the learned and to religious leaders.<\/p>\n<p>Gradually, especially after the Babylonian exile, Aramaic influence pervaded the land of Palestine. Nehemiah complained that children from mixed marriages were unable to speak Hebrew (Neh 13:24). The Jews seem to have continued using Aramaic widely during the Persian, Greek, and Roman periods. Eventually the Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Aramaic paraphrases, called Targums, some of which have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentUse\">New Testament Use<\/p>\n<p>In popular thought, Aramaic was the common language of Palestine during the time of Jesus. Yet that is by no means certain and probably is an oversimplification of the linguistic situation of that time. Names used in the NT reflect Aramaic (Bartholomew, Bar-Jonah, Barnabas), Greek (Andrew, Philip), and Latin (Mark), as well as Hebrew. There is no question that Aramaic was widely used, as were Greek and Hebrew. Latin was probably limited to military and governmental circles. Mishnaic Hebrew, a common kind of everyday Hebrew dialect, was also used in Jesus’ day; Mishnaic Hebrew documents have been discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>What was the “Hebrew” referred to in certain NT passages (Jn 5:2; 19:13, 17, 20; 20:16; Rv 9:11; 16:16)? The languages used for the inscription put on Jesus’ cross were “Hebrew, Latin, and Greek” (Jn 19:19-20). Later, the apostle Paul was said to speak “Hebrew” (Acts 22:2; 26:14). The exact dialect he spoke may be debated, but as a Pharisee he was undoubtedly able to read the Hebrew of the OT. The Greek word for “Hebrew” is sometimes translated “Aramaic” and may be a general term for Semitic, or for a blend of Hebrew-Aramaic (as Yiddish is German-Hebrew). At any rate, Aramaic served as a transition from Hebrew to Greek as the language spoken by Jews in Jesus’ day. In that sense Aramaic connects OT Hebrew with NT Greek.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ARAMAIC<\/h3>\n<p>One of the three original languages of the Bible, found in sections of the book of Daniel (2:4b–7:28) and Ezra (4:8–6:18; 7:12-26). Aramaic phrases and expressions also appear in Genesis (31:47), Jeremiah (10:11), and the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentUse\">Old Testament Use<\/p>\n<p>Aramaic is linguistically very close to Hebrew and similar in structure. Aramaic texts in the Bible are written in the same script as Hebrew. In contrast to Hebrew, Aramaic uses a larger vocabulary, including many loan words, and a greater variety of connectives. It also contains an elaborate system of tenses, developed through the use of participles with pronouns or with various forms of the verb “to be.” Although Aramaic is less euphonious and poetical than Hebrew, it is probably superior as a vehicle of exact expression.<\/p>\n<p>Aramaic has perhaps the longest continuous living history of any language known. It was used during the Bible’s patriarchal period and is still spoken by a few people today. Aramaic and its cognate, Syriac, evolved into many dialects in different places and periods. Characterized by simplicity, clarity, and precision, it adapted easily to the various needs of everyday life. It could serve equally well as a language for scholars, pupils, lawyers, or merchants. Some have described it as the Semitic equivalent of English.<\/p>\n<p>The origin of Aramaic is unknown, but it seems to have been closely related to Amorite and possibly to other ancient northwest Semitic dialects barely known to scholars. Although an Aramean kingdom as such never really existed, various Aramean “states” developed into influential centers. A few short Aramean inscriptions from that era (10th to 8th centuries <span>BC<\/span>) have been found and studied.<\/p>\n<p>By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, King Hezekiah’s representatives requested the spokesmen of the Assyrian king Sennacherib to “speak to your servants in Aramaic, since we understand it. Don’t speak to us in Hebrew in the hearing of the people on the wall” (2 Kgs 18:26, <span>niv<\/span>). By the Persian period, Aramaic had become the language of international trade. During their captivity, the Jews probably adopted it for convenience—certainly in commerce—while Hebrew became confined to the learned and to religious leaders.<\/p>\n<p>Gradually, especially after the Babylonian exile, Aramaic influence pervaded the land of Palestine. Nehemiah complained that children from mixed marriages were unable to speak Hebrew (Neh 13:24). The Jews seem to have continued using Aramaic widely during the Persian, Greek, and Roman periods. Eventually the Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Aramaic paraphrases, called Targums, some of which have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentUse\">New Testament Use<\/p>\n<p>In popular thought, Aramaic was the common language of Palestine during the time of Jesus. Yet that is by no means certain and probably is an oversimplification of the linguistic situation of that time. Names used in the NT reflect Aramaic (Bartholomew, Bar-Jonah, Barnabas), Greek (Andrew, Philip), and Latin (Mark), as well as Hebrew. There is no question that Aramaic was widely used, as were Greek and Hebrew. Latin was probably limited to military and governmental circles. Mishnaic Hebrew, a common kind of everyday Hebrew dialect, was also used in Jesus’ day; Mishnaic Hebrew documents have been discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>What was the “Hebrew” referred to in certain NT passages (Jn 5:2; 19:13, 17, 20; 20:16; Rv 9:11; 16:16)? The languages used for the inscription put on Jesus’ cross were “Hebrew, Latin, and Greek” (Jn 19:19-20). Later, the apostle Paul was said to speak “Hebrew” (Acts 22:2; 26:14). The exact dialect he spoke may be debated, but as a Pharisee he was undoubtedly able to read the Hebrew of the OT. The Greek word for “Hebrew” is sometimes translated “Aramaic” and may be a general term for Semitic, or for a blend of Hebrew-Aramaic (as Yiddish is German-Hebrew). At any rate, Aramaic served as a transition from Hebrew to Greek as the language spoken by Jews in Jesus’ day. In that sense Aramaic connects OT Hebrew with NT Greek.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ARAMAIC One of the three original languages of the Bible, found in sections of the book of Daniel (2:4b–7:28) and Ezra (4:8–6:18; 7:12-26). Aramaic phrases and expressions also appear in Genesis (31:47), Jeremiah (10:11), and the NT. Old Testament Use Aramaic is linguistically very close to Hebrew and similar in structure. Aramaic texts in the Bible are written in the same script as Hebrew. In contrast to Hebrew, Aramaic uses a larger vocabulary, including many loan words, and a greater varie...","summary_en":"ARAMAIC One of the three original languages of the Bible, found in sections of the book of Daniel (2:4b–7:28) and Ezra (4:8–6:18; 7:12-26). Aramaic phrases and expressions also appear in Genesis (31:47), Jeremiah (10:11), and the NT. Old Testament Use Aramaic is linguistically very close to Hebrew and similar in structure. Aramaic texts in the Bible are written in the same script as Hebrew. In contrast to Hebrew, Aramaic uses a larger vocabulary, including many loan words, and a greater varie...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4150,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Beggar","title_en":"Beggar","content_ro":"<h3>BEGGAR<\/h3>\n<p>One who asks for charity, especially one who lives by begging, a mendicant.<\/p>\n<p>Biblical references to begging are limited to such Hebrew verbs as “to seek” or “to ask,” and, as a noun, to “the poor and needy”; in the NT, Greek terms refer to being “poor” or “miserable,” and to those who “ask for more.” Professional beggars were unknown in Moses’ time, since the law made ample provision for taking care of the poor.<\/p>\n<p>Earliest legislation (Dt 15:11) mandated the care of those who were poor. There were regulations such as the Sabbath year, the year of remission to those indebted (Lv 25). In that year the produce of the land was left to the poor and destitute (Ex 23:11), and all debts were canceled (Dt 15:1). The duty of lending liberally to the poor was promoted (vv 7-11), and hired laborers were protected (24:14-15). The purpose was that “there should be no more poor among you” (15:4). Indeed, in the early days of Israelite settlement, all Israelites enjoyed a comparable standard of living.<\/p>\n<p>In excavations at Tirsah near Nablus, the size and arrangements of houses of the tenth century <span>BC<\/span> are all about the same. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, there is a striking contrast, with houses on the same site clearly divided into the town’s richer and poorer quarters. The social revolution between those two centuries was associated with the rise of the Israelite monarchy and growth of a class of officials who gained private profits from their positions. The prophets condemned the fact that wealth was ill-gotten and badly distributed in their day (e.g., Is 5:8; Hos 12:8; Am 8:4-7; Mi 2:2). The prophet Amos denounced creditors who felt no pity for the poor (Am 2:6-8; 8:6). Yet, throughout the OT, there is essentially no reference to beggars. During the intertestamental period, however, almsgiving became an important religious duty.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, begging seems to be prevalent. In the ministry of Jesus, references are made to a blind beggar (Jn 9:8-9), to blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-52), and to Lazarus, a godly beggar who is contrasted with a rich man (Lk 16:19-31). The apostles Peter and John encountered a crippled beggar by the “Beautiful,” or Nicanor, Gate in Jerusalem (Acts 3:1-11). Jesus rebuked an ostentatious show of almsgiving (Mt 6:1-4) but stressed the importance of giving to the poor from right motives (Mt 5:42-48). By the time of Jesus, Jerusalem had become a center for beggars, probably because almsgiving in the Holy City was then regarded as particularly meritorious. Begging in Jerusalem was concentrated around the holy places. The pool of Beth-zatha was a place of healing, and the sick, blind, lame, and paralyzed lay there to beg as well as to get into the waters for healing (Jn 5:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>In the early Christian community, the first organization of officers was made to provide for a fair distribution of funds to the poor (Acts 4:32-35; 6:1-6). On the first day of each week, some portion of each Christian’s income was to be allotted to the needy (11:27-30; Rom 15:25-27; 1 Cor 16:1-4). Possibly the poverty of Palestine was made worse by heavy Roman taxation; tax gatherers as well as beggars are prominent in the Gospel narratives. It has also been suggested that the rise of the Zealots was closely associated with the social factor of poverty; the revolutionary Zealots were largely comprised of society’s “dregs,” according to the Jewish historian Josephus. In <span>AD<\/span> 66 the Zealots burned the Jerusalem archives, no doubt intending to destroy the records of their debts kept there. Josephus reports that before the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, gangs of beggars were terrorizing the whole city. <em>See<\/em> Alms; Poor, The.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BEGGAR<\/h3>\n<p>One who asks for charity, especially one who lives by begging, a mendicant.<\/p>\n<p>Biblical references to begging are limited to such Hebrew verbs as “to seek” or “to ask,” and, as a noun, to “the poor and needy”; in the NT, Greek terms refer to being “poor” or “miserable,” and to those who “ask for more.” Professional beggars were unknown in Moses’ time, since the law made ample provision for taking care of the poor.<\/p>\n<p>Earliest legislation (Dt 15:11) mandated the care of those who were poor. There were regulations such as the Sabbath year, the year of remission to those indebted (Lv 25). In that year the produce of the land was left to the poor and destitute (Ex 23:11), and all debts were canceled (Dt 15:1). The duty of lending liberally to the poor was promoted (vv 7-11), and hired laborers were protected (24:14-15). The purpose was that “there should be no more poor among you” (15:4). Indeed, in the early days of Israelite settlement, all Israelites enjoyed a comparable standard of living.<\/p>\n<p>In excavations at Tirsah near Nablus, the size and arrangements of houses of the tenth century <span>BC<\/span> are all about the same. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, there is a striking contrast, with houses on the same site clearly divided into the town’s richer and poorer quarters. The social revolution between those two centuries was associated with the rise of the Israelite monarchy and growth of a class of officials who gained private profits from their positions. The prophets condemned the fact that wealth was ill-gotten and badly distributed in their day (e.g., Is 5:8; Hos 12:8; Am 8:4-7; Mi 2:2). The prophet Amos denounced creditors who felt no pity for the poor (Am 2:6-8; 8:6). Yet, throughout the OT, there is essentially no reference to beggars. During the intertestamental period, however, almsgiving became an important religious duty.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, begging seems to be prevalent. In the ministry of Jesus, references are made to a blind beggar (Jn 9:8-9), to blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-52), and to Lazarus, a godly beggar who is contrasted with a rich man (Lk 16:19-31). The apostles Peter and John encountered a crippled beggar by the “Beautiful,” or Nicanor, Gate in Jerusalem (Acts 3:1-11). Jesus rebuked an ostentatious show of almsgiving (Mt 6:1-4) but stressed the importance of giving to the poor from right motives (Mt 5:42-48). By the time of Jesus, Jerusalem had become a center for beggars, probably because almsgiving in the Holy City was then regarded as particularly meritorious. Begging in Jerusalem was concentrated around the holy places. The pool of Beth-zatha was a place of healing, and the sick, blind, lame, and paralyzed lay there to beg as well as to get into the waters for healing (Jn 5:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>In the early Christian community, the first organization of officers was made to provide for a fair distribution of funds to the poor (Acts 4:32-35; 6:1-6). On the first day of each week, some portion of each Christian’s income was to be allotted to the needy (11:27-30; Rom 15:25-27; 1 Cor 16:1-4). Possibly the poverty of Palestine was made worse by heavy Roman taxation; tax gatherers as well as beggars are prominent in the Gospel narratives. It has also been suggested that the rise of the Zealots was closely associated with the social factor of poverty; the revolutionary Zealots were largely comprised of society’s “dregs,” according to the Jewish historian Josephus. In <span>AD<\/span> 66 the Zealots burned the Jerusalem archives, no doubt intending to destroy the records of their debts kept there. Josephus reports that before the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, gangs of beggars were terrorizing the whole city. <em>See<\/em> Alms; Poor, The.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BEGGAR One who asks for charity, especially one who lives by begging, a mendicant. Biblical references to begging are limited to such Hebrew verbs as “to seek” or “to ask,” and, as a noun, to “the poor and needy”; in the NT, Greek terms refer to being “poor” or “miserable,” and to those who “ask for more.” Professional beggars were unknown in Moses’ time, since the law made ample provision for taking care of the poor. Earliest legislation (Dt 15:11) mandated the care of those who were poor. T...","summary_en":"BEGGAR One who asks for charity, especially one who lives by begging, a mendicant. Biblical references to begging are limited to such Hebrew verbs as “to seek” or “to ask,” and, as a noun, to “the poor and needy”; in the NT, Greek terms refer to being “poor” or “miserable,” and to those who “ask for more.” Professional beggars were unknown in Moses’ time, since the law made ample provision for taking care of the poor. Earliest legislation (Dt 15:11) mandated the care of those who were poor. T...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4464,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bethesda","title_en":"Bethesda","content_ro":"<h3>BETHESDA<\/h3>\n<p>Name of a pool in Jerusalem to which many sick and infirm people came (Jn 5:2). Bethesda is an Aramaic word transliterated into Greek and is the name of a pool in Jerusalem in Jesus’ day that was surrounded by five porches or colonnades that gave an arcadelike walkway around the pool. Located near the Sheep Gate, it was the place where the handicapped and ill came with the hope they would be miraculously healed if they could get into the pool at the proper time.<\/p>\n<p>A number of other forms of the name of this pool occur in different manuscripts. These are Bethsaida (“house of fish”), Belzetha, and Bezatha, the latter two apparently variants of Bethzaitha. Another form is Beth-zatha, meaning “house of olives.” Recent studies, especially of the Copper Scroll of Qumran Cave Three, suggest that Bethesda is the correct form among the several variations. Further, it is a dual form, which indicates that the site of Bethesda was characterized by two pools. This understanding shows that the older theory that Bethesda meant “house of mercy” is incorrect.<\/p>\n<p>The archaeological activity of the Franciscan Fathers of the Church of St Anne near St Stephen’s Gate in the Old City has been a corrective of older views as well as the means of clarifying where the pool actually was. Their research has shown that the pool of Bethesda is not to be identified with Birket Israel, a pool about 360 feet (109.7 meters) by 126 feet (38.4 meters), located between St Anne’s and the temple area to the south; or with the large cisterns under the convent of the Sisters of Zion several hundred yards west of St Anne’s on the Via Dolorosa; or with the pool adjacent to the Gihon, still farther south than Birket Israel on the slope of Ophel. Rather, the pool of Bethesda is to be identified with the excavated ruin in the St Anne Courtyard, a ruin with two pools of considerable size. Arched pillars originally bordering the two reservoirs were covered intact with 25 to 30 feet (7.5 to 9 meters) of debris. Excavated, these now stand impressively as witness to an astounding architectural achievement.<\/p>\n<p>Architectural style and inscription point to Herodian times, making it one of the many magnificent building projects of Herod the Great. The debris and ruins of several centuries were dumped into the pool area, filling the space around the still-standing colonnades. This debris was later leveled and a Byzantine church constructed on top of it in the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. Thus through various literary and archaeological studies, Bethesda is now correctly understood to mean “a place of two pools” located near the Sheep Market of St Stephen’s Gate. <em>See<\/em> Bethsaida; Beth-zatha.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BETHESDA<\/h3>\n<p>Name of a pool in Jerusalem to which many sick and infirm people came (Jn 5:2). Bethesda is an Aramaic word transliterated into Greek and is the name of a pool in Jerusalem in Jesus’ day that was surrounded by five porches or colonnades that gave an arcadelike walkway around the pool. Located near the Sheep Gate, it was the place where the handicapped and ill came with the hope they would be miraculously healed if they could get into the pool at the proper time.<\/p>\n<p>A number of other forms of the name of this pool occur in different manuscripts. These are Bethsaida (“house of fish”), Belzetha, and Bezatha, the latter two apparently variants of Bethzaitha. Another form is Beth-zatha, meaning “house of olives.” Recent studies, especially of the Copper Scroll of Qumran Cave Three, suggest that Bethesda is the correct form among the several variations. Further, it is a dual form, which indicates that the site of Bethesda was characterized by two pools. This understanding shows that the older theory that Bethesda meant “house of mercy” is incorrect.<\/p>\n<p>The archaeological activity of the Franciscan Fathers of the Church of St Anne near St Stephen’s Gate in the Old City has been a corrective of older views as well as the means of clarifying where the pool actually was. Their research has shown that the pool of Bethesda is not to be identified with Birket Israel, a pool about 360 feet (109.7 meters) by 126 feet (38.4 meters), located between St Anne’s and the temple area to the south; or with the large cisterns under the convent of the Sisters of Zion several hundred yards west of St Anne’s on the Via Dolorosa; or with the pool adjacent to the Gihon, still farther south than Birket Israel on the slope of Ophel. Rather, the pool of Bethesda is to be identified with the excavated ruin in the St Anne Courtyard, a ruin with two pools of considerable size. Arched pillars originally bordering the two reservoirs were covered intact with 25 to 30 feet (7.5 to 9 meters) of debris. Excavated, these now stand impressively as witness to an astounding architectural achievement.<\/p>\n<p>Architectural style and inscription point to Herodian times, making it one of the many magnificent building projects of Herod the Great. The debris and ruins of several centuries were dumped into the pool area, filling the space around the still-standing colonnades. This debris was later leveled and a Byzantine church constructed on top of it in the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. Thus through various literary and archaeological studies, Bethesda is now correctly understood to mean “a place of two pools” located near the Sheep Market of St Stephen’s Gate. <em>See<\/em> Bethsaida; Beth-zatha.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BETHESDA Name of a pool in Jerusalem to which many sick and infirm people came (Jn 5:2). Bethesda is an Aramaic word transliterated into Greek and is the name of a pool in Jerusalem in Jesus’ day that was surrounded by five porches or colonnades that gave an arcadelike walkway around the pool. Located near the Sheep Gate, it was the place where the handicapped and ill came with the hope they would be miraculously healed if they could get into the pool at the proper time. A number of other for...","summary_en":"BETHESDA Name of a pool in Jerusalem to which many sick and infirm people came (Jn 5:2). Bethesda is an Aramaic word transliterated into Greek and is the name of a pool in Jerusalem in Jesus’ day that was surrounded by five porches or colonnades that gave an arcadelike walkway around the pool. Located near the Sheep Gate, it was the place where the handicapped and ill came with the hope they would be miraculously healed if they could get into the pool at the proper time. A number of other for...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4590,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Beth-Zatha*","title_en":"Beth-Zatha*","content_ro":"<h3>BETH-ZATHA*<\/h3>\n<p>Variant name for the pool in Jerusalem. The name is generally believed to mean “house of olives,” occurring only in John 5:2. In many translations this is a variant given in the margin for Bethesda. <em>See<\/em> Bethesda.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BETH-ZATHA*<\/h3>\n<p>Variant name for the pool in Jerusalem. The name is generally believed to mean “house of olives,” occurring only in John 5:2. In many translations this is a variant given in the margin for Bethesda. <em>See<\/em> Bethesda.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BETH-ZATHA* Variant name for the pool in Jerusalem. The name is generally believed to mean “house of olives,” occurring only in John 5:2. In many translations this is a variant given in the margin for Bethesda. See Bethesda.","summary_en":"BETH-ZATHA* Variant name for the pool in Jerusalem. The name is generally believed to mean “house of olives,” occurring only in John 5:2. In many translations this is a variant given in the margin for Bethesda. See Bethesda.","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20175,"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":33440,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sabbath","title_en":"Sabbath","content_ro":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","summary_en":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34778,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sheep Gate","title_en":"Sheep Gate","content_ro":"<h3>SHEEP GATE<\/h3>\n<p>Jerusalem gate repaired by Eliashib and the priests under Nehemiah’s supervision during the postexilic era (Neh 3:1, 32; 12:39). It was positioned east of the Fish Gate by the Tower of the Hundred, near the pool of Bethesda (Bethsaida) and a short distance from the modern St Stephen’s Gate. In John 5:2 the <span>kjv<\/span> translates it “Sheep Market” and the <span>neb<\/span>, “Sheep-Pool.”<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHEEP GATE<\/h3>\n<p>Jerusalem gate repaired by Eliashib and the priests under Nehemiah’s supervision during the postexilic era (Neh 3:1, 32; 12:39). It was positioned east of the Fish Gate by the Tower of the Hundred, near the pool of Bethesda (Bethsaida) and a short distance from the modern St Stephen’s Gate. In John 5:2 the <span>kjv<\/span> translates it “Sheep Market” and the <span>neb<\/span>, “Sheep-Pool.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHEEP GATE Jerusalem gate repaired by Eliashib and the priests under Nehemiah’s supervision during the postexilic era (Neh 3:1, 32; 12:39). It was positioned east of the Fish Gate by the Tower of the Hundred, near the pool of Bethesda (Bethsaida) and a short distance from the modern St Stephen’s Gate. In John 5:2 the kjv translates it “Sheep Market” and the neb, “Sheep-Pool.”","summary_en":"SHEEP GATE Jerusalem gate repaired by Eliashib and the priests under Nehemiah’s supervision during the postexilic era (Neh 3:1, 32; 12:39). It was positioned east of the Fish Gate by the Tower of the Hundred, near the pool of Bethesda (Bethsaida) and a short distance from the modern St Stephen’s Gate. In John 5:2 the kjv translates it “Sheep Market” and the neb, “Sheep-Pool.”","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56404,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:2","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:2<\/strong> Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name <em>Bethesda<\/em><em>,<\/em> so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is <em>Beth-esda<\/em> (“house of flowing”).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:2<\/strong> Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name <em>Bethesda<\/em><em>,<\/em> so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is <em>Beth-esda<\/em> (“house of flowing”).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name Bethesda, so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is Beth-esda (“house of flowing”).","summary_en":"5:2 Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name Bethesda, so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is Beth-esda (“house of flowing”).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84030,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:2","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:2<\/strong> Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name <em>Bethesda<\/em><em>,<\/em> so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is <em>Beth-esda<\/em> (“house of flowing”).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:2<\/strong> Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name <em>Bethesda<\/em><em>,<\/em> so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is <em>Beth-esda<\/em> (“house of flowing”).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name Bethesda, so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is Beth-esda (“house of flowing”).","summary_en":"5:2 Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name Bethesda, so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is Beth-esda (“house of flowing”).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111656,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:2","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:2<\/strong> Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name <em>Bethesda<\/em><em>,<\/em> so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is <em>Beth-esda<\/em> (“house of flowing”).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:2<\/strong> Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name <em>Bethesda<\/em><em>,<\/em> so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is <em>Beth-esda<\/em> (“house of flowing”).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name Bethesda, so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is Beth-esda (“house of flowing”).","summary_en":"5:2 Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name Bethesda, so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is Beth-esda (“house of flowing”).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139282,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:2","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:2<\/strong> Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name <em>Bethesda<\/em><em>,<\/em> so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is <em>Beth-esda<\/em> (“house of flowing”).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:2<\/strong> Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name <em>Bethesda<\/em><em>,<\/em> so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is <em>Beth-esda<\/em> (“house of flowing”).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name Bethesda, so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is Beth-esda (“house of flowing”).","summary_en":"5:2 Greek copyists who had never been to Jerusalem had difficulty interpreting and spelling the name Bethesda, so there are several variants of this name in the manuscripts. The best choice is Beth-esda (“house of flowing”).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":28861,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Paralysis*, Paralytic*, Paralyzed","title_en":"Paralysis*, Paralytic*, Paralyzed","content_ro":"<h3>PARALYSIS*, PARALYTIC*, PARALYZED<\/h3>\n<p>Symptom of an organic disease of the central nervous system affecting the temporary or permanent loss of sensation and\/or voluntary muscle control. This degenerative condition was usually incurable. A few cases of paralysis (palsy) are mentioned in the NT, all of which occur in connection with Christ’s healing ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Paralytics were included in the group of ailing people seeking Jesus’ healing in Galilee (Mt 4:24), numbered among the sick at Bethesda in Jerusalem (Jn 5:3), and represented among those cured by Philip in Samaria (Acts 8:7). The paralyzed servant of the centurion was described by Luke as very sick and at the point of death (Lk 7:2). This man was probably victimized by an often fatal form of paralysis that begins in the legs and spreads rapidly upward through the rest of the body. The paralytic at Capernaum was most likely ailing from paraplegia, a paralysis of the lower half of the body (Mt 9:2, 6; Mk 2:3-10; Lk 5:18, 24). This disease may have been brought on by an injury at birth or by damage to the spinal cord. Perhaps Aeneas, whom Peter healed at Lydda, also suffered from paraplegia (Acts 9:33).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Disease; Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PARALYSIS*, PARALYTIC*, PARALYZED<\/h3>\n<p>Symptom of an organic disease of the central nervous system affecting the temporary or permanent loss of sensation and\/or voluntary muscle control. This degenerative condition was usually incurable. A few cases of paralysis (palsy) are mentioned in the NT, all of which occur in connection with Christ’s healing ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Paralytics were included in the group of ailing people seeking Jesus’ healing in Galilee (Mt 4:24), numbered among the sick at Bethesda in Jerusalem (Jn 5:3), and represented among those cured by Philip in Samaria (Acts 8:7). The paralyzed servant of the centurion was described by Luke as very sick and at the point of death (Lk 7:2). This man was probably victimized by an often fatal form of paralysis that begins in the legs and spreads rapidly upward through the rest of the body. The paralytic at Capernaum was most likely ailing from paraplegia, a paralysis of the lower half of the body (Mt 9:2, 6; Mk 2:3-10; Lk 5:18, 24). This disease may have been brought on by an injury at birth or by damage to the spinal cord. Perhaps Aeneas, whom Peter healed at Lydda, also suffered from paraplegia (Acts 9:33).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Disease; Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PARALYSIS*, PARALYTIC*, PARALYZED Symptom of an organic disease of the central nervous system affecting the temporary or permanent loss of sensation and\/or voluntary muscle control. This degenerative condition was usually incurable. A few cases of paralysis (palsy) are mentioned in the NT, all of which occur in connection with Christ’s healing ministry. Paralytics were included in the group of ailing people seeking Jesus’ healing in Galilee (Mt 4:24), numbered among the sick at Bethesda in Je...","summary_en":"PARALYSIS*, PARALYTIC*, PARALYZED Symptom of an organic disease of the central nervous system affecting the temporary or permanent loss of sensation and\/or voluntary muscle control. This degenerative condition was usually incurable. A few cases of paralysis (palsy) are mentioned in the NT, all of which occur in connection with Christ’s healing ministry. Paralytics were included in the group of ailing people seeking Jesus’ healing in Galilee (Mt 4:24), numbered among the sick at Bethesda in Je...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56405,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:3<\/strong> The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for <em>crowds of sick people<\/em> who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:3<\/strong> The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for <em>crowds of sick people<\/em> who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for crowds of sick people who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.","summary_en":"5:3 The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for crowds of sick people who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84031,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:3<\/strong> The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for <em>crowds of sick people<\/em> who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:3<\/strong> The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for <em>crowds of sick people<\/em> who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for crowds of sick people who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.","summary_en":"5:3 The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for crowds of sick people who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111657,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:3<\/strong> The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for <em>crowds of sick people<\/em> who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:3<\/strong> The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for <em>crowds of sick people<\/em> who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for crowds of sick people who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.","summary_en":"5:3 The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for crowds of sick people who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139283,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:3<\/strong> The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for <em>crowds of sick people<\/em> who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:3<\/strong> The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for <em>crowds of sick people<\/em> who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for crowds of sick people who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.","summary_en":"5:3 The pool of Bethesda had become a healing sanctuary for crowds of sick people who believed miraculous cures were possible. • Most scholars believe that the variant reading in the NLT textual note was not part of John’s original text, but it represents an ancient tradition that provided helpful background information.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":23243,"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":26020,"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":56406,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:5<\/strong> No social program helped this man, who had been ill for <em>thirty-eight years<\/em>. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:5<\/strong> No social program helped this man, who had been ill for <em>thirty-eight years<\/em>. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 No social program helped this man, who had been ill for thirty-eight years. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.","summary_en":"5:5 No social program helped this man, who had been ill for thirty-eight years. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84032,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:5<\/strong> No social program helped this man, who had been ill for <em>thirty-eight years<\/em>. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:5<\/strong> No social program helped this man, who had been ill for <em>thirty-eight years<\/em>. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 No social program helped this man, who had been ill for thirty-eight years. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.","summary_en":"5:5 No social program helped this man, who had been ill for thirty-eight years. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111658,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:5<\/strong> No social program helped this man, who had been ill for <em>thirty-eight years<\/em>. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:5<\/strong> No social program helped this man, who had been ill for <em>thirty-eight years<\/em>. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 No social program helped this man, who had been ill for thirty-eight years. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.","summary_en":"5:5 No social program helped this man, who had been ill for thirty-eight years. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139284,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:5<\/strong> No social program helped this man, who had been ill for <em>thirty-eight years<\/em>. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:5<\/strong> No social program helped this man, who had been ill for <em>thirty-eight years<\/em>. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 No social program helped this man, who had been ill for thirty-eight years. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.","summary_en":"5:5 No social program helped this man, who had been ill for thirty-eight years. Hygiene and mobility were impossible, and he likely begged for a living from people who came to use the pool (see 5:7). His situation seemed hopeless.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":9716,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Disease","title_en":"Disease","content_ro":"<h3>DISEASE<\/h3>\n<p>Term used in Scripture synonymously with sickness, infirmity, illness, plague, and pestilence. However, plague and pestilence are generally used when there are large numbers of victims, as in epidemics. “Pestilence” literally means “destruction” and usually describes an epidemic with a high mortality rate. “Affliction” and “torment” are other terms that may include disease, but are broader and are not used synonymously with disease.<\/p>\n<p>During the time the Bible was written, people did not have a detailed concept of anatomy or of how the specific organs of the body functioned. Disease was thought of as abnormal, something that limits one’s ability to function with strength and vitality. The Hebrew word translated “sickness” as a noun means “to be weak” in its cognate verb form. The sick man by the pool of Bethesda is described as being “impotent” (Jn 5:7, <span>kjv<\/span>), unable to get around by himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SourcesofDisease\">Sources of Disease<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, disease has four sources: (1) God, (2) Satan, (3) sins of ancestors, and (4) breaking of physical, mental\/emotional, or moral laws of nature.<\/p>\n<h5>God<\/h5>\n<p>All early peoples attributed events and phenomena to the supernatural, either to various gods or to evil spirits. The Hebrews were different by being strong monotheists, attributing all phenomena to the one true God who had revealed himself to them (Is 45:21). God was responsible for everything, including disease and evil (v 7). This same God could also give material blessings, health, and heal all diseases (Ps 103:3). To the Hebrews, God could give health or sickness, and in either case, he had his purpose or reason.<\/p>\n<p>One purpose of disease was punishment for wrongdoing (2 Sm 24:1, 12-16; 1 Cor 10:8). In the Hebrew mind, even when the immediate cause of the disease and death was obvious—as in many poisonous snakes biting people in the camp—the response was not to kill all the snakes but to pray to God for forgiveness (Nm 21:4-9). Leprosy, which literally means “a smiting,” was a devastating disease sent by God to punish individuals who sinned (Nm 12; 2 Kgs 5:27).<\/p>\n<p>God also sent disease to demonstrate his power or to protect his people. The 10 plagues in Egypt illustrate the former; the elimination of Sennacherib’s army, the latter (2 Kgs 19:34-36).<\/p>\n<h5>Satan<\/h5>\n<p>Satan and other evil spirits could also be responsible for disease. In the biblical scheme of things, Satan’s ability to bring disease is in the permissive will of God. The restriction on Satan’s capacity for harm is clearly spelled out in the case of Job (Jb 1:12). The message of the NT is also clear that, despite cases of demonpossession and of people acting under Satan’s influence, Satan’s time is finite and his ultimate total defeat and destruction are certain.<\/p>\n<h5>Sins of Ancestors<\/h5>\n<p>Sickness could also come about because of the sins of one’s ancestors (Ex 20:5; Lv 26:29; 1 Kgs 17:18; Jb 21:19; Lam 5:7). The most striking example of this is the death of David’s son as a result of his sin with Bathsheba (2 Sm 12:15). This concept of the origin of disease continued into NT times and was familiar to the disciples of Jesus (Jn 9:2).<\/p>\n<h5>Violation of Natural Laws<\/h5>\n<p>This idea sets the Hebrews apart from the other peoples of their day. With the understanding that disease can follow the violation of fixed physical, mental\/emotional, and moral laws comes the idea of personal accountability in obeying these laws and avoiding disease. A person is responsible for his and the community’s health and is not merely a passive victim of supernatural forces.<\/p>\n<p>Based on this concept, Moses set up elaborate codes of behavior to maintain personal health and the health of the community. The Mosaic law covers the areas of diet, personal hygiene, Sabbath observance, sanitary regulations in the camp, cleanliness, and sexual relations. In following these natural laws established by God, the Hebrews could expect freedom from disease (Ex 15:26) and long life (Prv 3:1-2). These health laws of Moses make a lot of sense from a public health point of view even today and are far more rational than the approach of any other ancient people.<\/p>\n<p>Another major consequence of understanding that disease can follow the breaking of the laws of nature is the shift away from the priest and toward physicians when looking for cures. As long as diseases were of supernatural origin, there was no basis for attempting to learn about disease processes in the search for cures. The Hebrews were familiar with physicians in Egypt (Gn 50:2), where they seem to have functioned as embalmers. Physicians were practicing in Israel throughout its history, but only gradually developed the capacity to be of much help (2 Chr 16:12; Jer 8:22; Mk 5:26; Col 4:14). While validating the use of physicians for sick people (Mt 9:12) and of drugs for medicinal purposes (Prv 31:6; 1 Tm 5:23), the Scriptures emphasize the role of the Christian community and its elders in ministering to the sick (Jas 5:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusChristandDisease\">Jesus Christ and Disease<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s approach to people with disease was distinctly different than that of the OT. He was nonjudgmental, interacting with them as people of worth, not as social outcasts. He was full of genuine compassion for them as suffering people—touching them, comforting them, healing them, and speaking normally and naturally with them.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently thought of disease as a hindrance that prevented people from being the whole persons they were created to be. When confronted by a woman with a severe back deformity of 18 years duration, he healed her, saying she had been “bound by Satan” (Lk 13:16). His healing of incurable diseases was one of the proofs he offered that he was the Messiah (Lk 7:19-23). His ministry was directed toward releasing men and women to live life more abundantly (Jn 10:10). He did not fully subscribe to the punitive concept of disease (9:3). When a leper mentioned the possibility that it might not be God’s will for him to be well, Jesus healed him instantly (Mk 1:40; Lk 5:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was always concerned with the person’s total health or wholeness, rather than merely the symptoms of disease. He frequently dealt with spiritual issues first, even though the sick person was brought to him for a physical problem. His conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well focused on the basic conflicts in her disturbed personality (Jn 4:5-30). And the Sermon on the Mount, which basically deals with right attitudes and motives for human behavior, would greatly reduce personal and social suffering if it were followed. To Jesus, health is more than the mere absence of physical and mental disease; it is whole persons being all that they were meant to be.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Pestilence; Plague.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DISEASE<\/h3>\n<p>Term used in Scripture synonymously with sickness, infirmity, illness, plague, and pestilence. However, plague and pestilence are generally used when there are large numbers of victims, as in epidemics. “Pestilence” literally means “destruction” and usually describes an epidemic with a high mortality rate. “Affliction” and “torment” are other terms that may include disease, but are broader and are not used synonymously with disease.<\/p>\n<p>During the time the Bible was written, people did not have a detailed concept of anatomy or of how the specific organs of the body functioned. Disease was thought of as abnormal, something that limits one’s ability to function with strength and vitality. The Hebrew word translated “sickness” as a noun means “to be weak” in its cognate verb form. The sick man by the pool of Bethesda is described as being “impotent” (Jn 5:7, <span>kjv<\/span>), unable to get around by himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SourcesofDisease\">Sources of Disease<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, disease has four sources: (1) God, (2) Satan, (3) sins of ancestors, and (4) breaking of physical, mental\/emotional, or moral laws of nature.<\/p>\n<h5>God<\/h5>\n<p>All early peoples attributed events and phenomena to the supernatural, either to various gods or to evil spirits. The Hebrews were different by being strong monotheists, attributing all phenomena to the one true God who had revealed himself to them (Is 45:21). God was responsible for everything, including disease and evil (v 7). This same God could also give material blessings, health, and heal all diseases (Ps 103:3). To the Hebrews, God could give health or sickness, and in either case, he had his purpose or reason.<\/p>\n<p>One purpose of disease was punishment for wrongdoing (2 Sm 24:1, 12-16; 1 Cor 10:8). In the Hebrew mind, even when the immediate cause of the disease and death was obvious—as in many poisonous snakes biting people in the camp—the response was not to kill all the snakes but to pray to God for forgiveness (Nm 21:4-9). Leprosy, which literally means “a smiting,” was a devastating disease sent by God to punish individuals who sinned (Nm 12; 2 Kgs 5:27).<\/p>\n<p>God also sent disease to demonstrate his power or to protect his people. The 10 plagues in Egypt illustrate the former; the elimination of Sennacherib’s army, the latter (2 Kgs 19:34-36).<\/p>\n<h5>Satan<\/h5>\n<p>Satan and other evil spirits could also be responsible for disease. In the biblical scheme of things, Satan’s ability to bring disease is in the permissive will of God. The restriction on Satan’s capacity for harm is clearly spelled out in the case of Job (Jb 1:12). The message of the NT is also clear that, despite cases of demonpossession and of people acting under Satan’s influence, Satan’s time is finite and his ultimate total defeat and destruction are certain.<\/p>\n<h5>Sins of Ancestors<\/h5>\n<p>Sickness could also come about because of the sins of one’s ancestors (Ex 20:5; Lv 26:29; 1 Kgs 17:18; Jb 21:19; Lam 5:7). The most striking example of this is the death of David’s son as a result of his sin with Bathsheba (2 Sm 12:15). This concept of the origin of disease continued into NT times and was familiar to the disciples of Jesus (Jn 9:2).<\/p>\n<h5>Violation of Natural Laws<\/h5>\n<p>This idea sets the Hebrews apart from the other peoples of their day. With the understanding that disease can follow the violation of fixed physical, mental\/emotional, and moral laws comes the idea of personal accountability in obeying these laws and avoiding disease. A person is responsible for his and the community’s health and is not merely a passive victim of supernatural forces.<\/p>\n<p>Based on this concept, Moses set up elaborate codes of behavior to maintain personal health and the health of the community. The Mosaic law covers the areas of diet, personal hygiene, Sabbath observance, sanitary regulations in the camp, cleanliness, and sexual relations. In following these natural laws established by God, the Hebrews could expect freedom from disease (Ex 15:26) and long life (Prv 3:1-2). These health laws of Moses make a lot of sense from a public health point of view even today and are far more rational than the approach of any other ancient people.<\/p>\n<p>Another major consequence of understanding that disease can follow the breaking of the laws of nature is the shift away from the priest and toward physicians when looking for cures. As long as diseases were of supernatural origin, there was no basis for attempting to learn about disease processes in the search for cures. The Hebrews were familiar with physicians in Egypt (Gn 50:2), where they seem to have functioned as embalmers. Physicians were practicing in Israel throughout its history, but only gradually developed the capacity to be of much help (2 Chr 16:12; Jer 8:22; Mk 5:26; Col 4:14). While validating the use of physicians for sick people (Mt 9:12) and of drugs for medicinal purposes (Prv 31:6; 1 Tm 5:23), the Scriptures emphasize the role of the Christian community and its elders in ministering to the sick (Jas 5:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusChristandDisease\">Jesus Christ and Disease<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s approach to people with disease was distinctly different than that of the OT. He was nonjudgmental, interacting with them as people of worth, not as social outcasts. He was full of genuine compassion for them as suffering people—touching them, comforting them, healing them, and speaking normally and naturally with them.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently thought of disease as a hindrance that prevented people from being the whole persons they were created to be. When confronted by a woman with a severe back deformity of 18 years duration, he healed her, saying she had been “bound by Satan” (Lk 13:16). His healing of incurable diseases was one of the proofs he offered that he was the Messiah (Lk 7:19-23). His ministry was directed toward releasing men and women to live life more abundantly (Jn 10:10). He did not fully subscribe to the punitive concept of disease (9:3). When a leper mentioned the possibility that it might not be God’s will for him to be well, Jesus healed him instantly (Mk 1:40; Lk 5:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was always concerned with the person’s total health or wholeness, rather than merely the symptoms of disease. He frequently dealt with spiritual issues first, even though the sick person was brought to him for a physical problem. His conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well focused on the basic conflicts in her disturbed personality (Jn 4:5-30). And the Sermon on the Mount, which basically deals with right attitudes and motives for human behavior, would greatly reduce personal and social suffering if it were followed. To Jesus, health is more than the mere absence of physical and mental disease; it is whole persons being all that they were meant to be.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Pestilence; Plague.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DISEASE Term used in Scripture synonymously with sickness, infirmity, illness, plague, and pestilence. However, plague and pestilence are generally used when there are large numbers of victims, as in epidemics. “Pestilence” literally means “destruction” and usually describes an epidemic with a high mortality rate. “Affliction” and “torment” are other terms that may include disease, but are broader and are not used synonymously with disease. During the time the Bible was written, people did no...","summary_en":"DISEASE Term used in Scripture synonymously with sickness, infirmity, illness, plague, and pestilence. However, plague and pestilence are generally used when there are large numbers of victims, as in epidemics. “Pestilence” literally means “destruction” and usually describes an epidemic with a high mortality rate. “Affliction” and “torment” are other terms that may include disease, but are broader and are not used synonymously with disease. During the time the Bible was written, people did no...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":12965,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Furniture","title_en":"Furniture","content_ro":"<h3>FURNITURE<\/h3>\n<p>Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinOldTestamentTimes\">Palestine in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references to beds in the OT, using at least three Hebrew nouns. Jacob is pictured as sitting up in bed (Gn 48:2) and as dying on his bed (49:33). Moses threatened that frogs would invade the bedroom and bed of the Egyptian pharaoh (Ex 8:3). Michal, Saul’s daughter, placed an effigy in David’s bed (1 Sm 19:11-17) when Saul sent messengers to capture him there. King David condemned the practice of killing a defenseless person sleeping in bed (2 Sm 4:7, 11). The prophet Elijah laid a dead boy on his bed and revived him (1 Kgs 17:19).<\/p>\n<p>King Ahab sulked on his bed (1 Kgs 21:4), and King Ahaziah lay on his sick bed (2 Kgs 1:4-6, 16). The prophet Amos criticized the rich who lay on beds of ivory and stretched out on their couches (Am 6:4). The prophet Ezekiel spoke symbolically of disobedient Jerusalem as a prostitute sitting on a stately couch with the Lord’s incense and oil on a table nearby (Ez 23:41). Isaiah promised that the righteous would rest in their beds (Is 57:2) and also spoke of the unrighteous setting their beds among false worshipers (vv 7-8). The psalmist flooded his bed with tears (Ps 6:6), and Proverbs refers to a sluggard on his bed (Prv 26:14).<\/p>\n<p>“Table” in the OT refers both to the temple table for the bread of the Presence and to the table used in the palace or home for meals or banquets. King Adoni-bezek had his captives scrambling for scraps under his table (Jgs 1:7). Jonathan’s disabled son Mephibosheth was allowed to sit at David’s table (2 Sm 9:7, 10-13; 19:28). Solomon’s table is described several times (1 Kgs 2:7; 4:27). The queen of Sheba was particularly impressed by the food and table service in Solomon’s palace (10:5). The prophets frequently refer to tables (Is 21:5; 28:8; 65:11; Ez 40:39-43). The few references to chairs describe people reclining at meals and indicate couches rather than actual chairs (Am 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous mentions of thrones, including those of the pharaoh (Gn 41:40; Ex 11:5), David (2 Sm 3:10; 7:13), Solomon (1 Kgs 10:18), the kings of Israel and Judah (1 Kgs 22:10), and God (1 Kgs 22:19; Pss 9:4, 7; 11:4; 93:2). The OT writers sometimes indicate thrones decorated with ivory (1 Kgs 10:18).<\/p>\n<p>The exact character of furniture in Palestine is difficult to determine. Bas-reliefs and wall paintings are more common among Israel’s neighbors. Excavations in Jericho, however, have unearthed some valuable archaeological clues. Tombs of the middle Bronze Age produced reasonably well-preserved tables, stools, and boxes, making possible a study of ancient joinery methods. A variety of small trinket boxes show evidence of bone inlay and incised decoration. Some large slabs of timber may have been beds. Although primarily Canaanite styles, the furniture reflects the household furniture used in Israel in the centuries to follow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GreekandRoman\">Greek and Roman<\/p>\n<p>Historians are quite informed about Greek furniture because of the abundance of decorated vases, bas-reliefs, bronze and terra-cotta statuettes, and literary descriptions. That archaeological evidence indicates that Greek furniture was influenced by preceding civilizations. The picture is generally one of comparative simplicity, far removed from the cluttered and crowded rooms of later civilizations.<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks made several types of seats: (1) the throne, often with a back, legs of various shapes, and armrests; (2) the lighter curved-back chair with arm supports; (3) the four-legged stool; (4) the folding stool with crossed legs traceable to Egyptian models; and (5) the bench. Representations that regularly appear on monuments dating from the eighth to the second century <span>BC<\/span> link Greek chairs to Egyptian and Assyrian prototypes.<\/p>\n<p>Greeks used couches for sleeping and for reclining at meals. Footstools were used to rest the feet or as a step up to higher couches. Like chair legs, couch legs varied in style. Some were carved in the shape of animal legs, some were turned, some were rectangular. From about the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, the legs projected above the frame. Such projections later became headboards and footboards. In Hellenistic times these headrests and footrests were carved and carried bronze medallions in high relief depicting children, satyrs, and animals. Turned legs replaced the rectangular ones. Couches were normally in wood, although bronze and marble couches are known.<\/p>\n<p>Tables were used during meals to hold dishes and food and were removed after the meal. They were made of wood, bronze, and marble and normally had four legs, but three-legged tables were occasionally used. Chests, large and small, served to store clothes, jewelry, and other articles. They were normally of wood, although some were bronze.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rome\">Rome<\/p>\n<p>Roman furniture continued many Greek patterns. The eruption of the volcano Vesuvius in <span>AD<\/span> 79 preserved actual pieces of Roman furniture in its lava flow.<\/p>\n<p>Chairs with backs were heavier than their Greek counterparts and widely used. There were several types of stools: the folding stool, mostly wooden, though sometimes metal; and a newly developed decorative stool, often of bronze, that was supported by four curved legs ornamented with scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>A variety of couches were in use. Some followed Greek models, but others were of Roman invention. Excellent examples of bronze bed frames have been preserved. Presumably, interlaced strips of leather or cords were stretched crisscross on the frame. Gold, silver, tortoiseshell, bone, and ivory decoration were used along with veneer work in rare timber. Later, couches in Italy and in other lands had high backs and sides. The Romans seem to have used tables more widely than Greeks. They appear often as permanent supports for vases and other possessions. Tables were normally rectangular with four legs, but table makers also constructed some with three legs, or even resting on a single support. Round tabletops and legs of animals became popular from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> on. Plain, undecorated wooden tables and benches were used in kitchens and workshops. Outdoor tables were usually of marble with carved animal legs or decorative figures of animals and monsters.<\/p>\n<p>There were various chests and boxes in daily use. Shelves and cupboards became much more popular than in Greek times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinNewTestamentTimes\">Palestine in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The nature of furniture in the NT is probably best understood in relation to contemporaneous Roman models. The NT refers to beds in several passages. People brought a paralytic lying on his bed to Jesus (Mt 9:2, 6; Lk 5:18). When the apostles went into Solomon’s portico, people brought the sick to them on beds (Acts 5:15). A Syro-Phoenician woman’s sick child lay on a bed (Mk 7:30). Jesus spoke of setting a lamp on a stand and not placing it under a bed (Mk 4:21; Lk 8:16), and described what would happen to people in bed when the Day of the Lord came (Lk 17:34). In another parable Jesus spoke of a needy person begging for bread at midnight from a friend who was already in bed with his family (Lk 11:7). Beds of the poor and sick were probably only pallets or mattresses (Mk 6:55; Jn 5:8). When people reclined at meals, they would have been lying on a couch (Jn 13:23).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous NT references to tables. Jesus mentioned crumbs falling from a rich man’s table (Mt 15:27; Mk 7:28; Lk 16:21). Jesus overthrew the money changers’ tables in the temple (Mt 21:12; Mk 11:15). Jesus sat with his disciples at a table for the Passover meal (Lk 22:21) and promised his disciples that they would sit at his table in God’s kingdom. The apostles were relieved of serving tables in order to preach (Acts 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>The household lamp is referred to a number of times (Mt 25:1; Mk 4:21). Terra-cotta domestic lamps have been found in abundance in excavations.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FURNITURE<\/h3>\n<p>Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinOldTestamentTimes\">Palestine in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references to beds in the OT, using at least three Hebrew nouns. Jacob is pictured as sitting up in bed (Gn 48:2) and as dying on his bed (49:33). Moses threatened that frogs would invade the bedroom and bed of the Egyptian pharaoh (Ex 8:3). Michal, Saul’s daughter, placed an effigy in David’s bed (1 Sm 19:11-17) when Saul sent messengers to capture him there. King David condemned the practice of killing a defenseless person sleeping in bed (2 Sm 4:7, 11). The prophet Elijah laid a dead boy on his bed and revived him (1 Kgs 17:19).<\/p>\n<p>King Ahab sulked on his bed (1 Kgs 21:4), and King Ahaziah lay on his sick bed (2 Kgs 1:4-6, 16). The prophet Amos criticized the rich who lay on beds of ivory and stretched out on their couches (Am 6:4). The prophet Ezekiel spoke symbolically of disobedient Jerusalem as a prostitute sitting on a stately couch with the Lord’s incense and oil on a table nearby (Ez 23:41). Isaiah promised that the righteous would rest in their beds (Is 57:2) and also spoke of the unrighteous setting their beds among false worshipers (vv 7-8). The psalmist flooded his bed with tears (Ps 6:6), and Proverbs refers to a sluggard on his bed (Prv 26:14).<\/p>\n<p>“Table” in the OT refers both to the temple table for the bread of the Presence and to the table used in the palace or home for meals or banquets. King Adoni-bezek had his captives scrambling for scraps under his table (Jgs 1:7). Jonathan’s disabled son Mephibosheth was allowed to sit at David’s table (2 Sm 9:7, 10-13; 19:28). Solomon’s table is described several times (1 Kgs 2:7; 4:27). The queen of Sheba was particularly impressed by the food and table service in Solomon’s palace (10:5). The prophets frequently refer to tables (Is 21:5; 28:8; 65:11; Ez 40:39-43). The few references to chairs describe people reclining at meals and indicate couches rather than actual chairs (Am 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous mentions of thrones, including those of the pharaoh (Gn 41:40; Ex 11:5), David (2 Sm 3:10; 7:13), Solomon (1 Kgs 10:18), the kings of Israel and Judah (1 Kgs 22:10), and God (1 Kgs 22:19; Pss 9:4, 7; 11:4; 93:2). The OT writers sometimes indicate thrones decorated with ivory (1 Kgs 10:18).<\/p>\n<p>The exact character of furniture in Palestine is difficult to determine. Bas-reliefs and wall paintings are more common among Israel’s neighbors. Excavations in Jericho, however, have unearthed some valuable archaeological clues. Tombs of the middle Bronze Age produced reasonably well-preserved tables, stools, and boxes, making possible a study of ancient joinery methods. A variety of small trinket boxes show evidence of bone inlay and incised decoration. Some large slabs of timber may have been beds. Although primarily Canaanite styles, the furniture reflects the household furniture used in Israel in the centuries to follow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GreekandRoman\">Greek and Roman<\/p>\n<p>Historians are quite informed about Greek furniture because of the abundance of decorated vases, bas-reliefs, bronze and terra-cotta statuettes, and literary descriptions. That archaeological evidence indicates that Greek furniture was influenced by preceding civilizations. The picture is generally one of comparative simplicity, far removed from the cluttered and crowded rooms of later civilizations.<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks made several types of seats: (1) the throne, often with a back, legs of various shapes, and armrests; (2) the lighter curved-back chair with arm supports; (3) the four-legged stool; (4) the folding stool with crossed legs traceable to Egyptian models; and (5) the bench. Representations that regularly appear on monuments dating from the eighth to the second century <span>BC<\/span> link Greek chairs to Egyptian and Assyrian prototypes.<\/p>\n<p>Greeks used couches for sleeping and for reclining at meals. Footstools were used to rest the feet or as a step up to higher couches. Like chair legs, couch legs varied in style. Some were carved in the shape of animal legs, some were turned, some were rectangular. From about the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, the legs projected above the frame. Such projections later became headboards and footboards. In Hellenistic times these headrests and footrests were carved and carried bronze medallions in high relief depicting children, satyrs, and animals. Turned legs replaced the rectangular ones. Couches were normally in wood, although bronze and marble couches are known.<\/p>\n<p>Tables were used during meals to hold dishes and food and were removed after the meal. They were made of wood, bronze, and marble and normally had four legs, but three-legged tables were occasionally used. Chests, large and small, served to store clothes, jewelry, and other articles. They were normally of wood, although some were bronze.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rome\">Rome<\/p>\n<p>Roman furniture continued many Greek patterns. The eruption of the volcano Vesuvius in <span>AD<\/span> 79 preserved actual pieces of Roman furniture in its lava flow.<\/p>\n<p>Chairs with backs were heavier than their Greek counterparts and widely used. There were several types of stools: the folding stool, mostly wooden, though sometimes metal; and a newly developed decorative stool, often of bronze, that was supported by four curved legs ornamented with scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>A variety of couches were in use. Some followed Greek models, but others were of Roman invention. Excellent examples of bronze bed frames have been preserved. Presumably, interlaced strips of leather or cords were stretched crisscross on the frame. Gold, silver, tortoiseshell, bone, and ivory decoration were used along with veneer work in rare timber. Later, couches in Italy and in other lands had high backs and sides. The Romans seem to have used tables more widely than Greeks. They appear often as permanent supports for vases and other possessions. Tables were normally rectangular with four legs, but table makers also constructed some with three legs, or even resting on a single support. Round tabletops and legs of animals became popular from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> on. Plain, undecorated wooden tables and benches were used in kitchens and workshops. Outdoor tables were usually of marble with carved animal legs or decorative figures of animals and monsters.<\/p>\n<p>There were various chests and boxes in daily use. Shelves and cupboards became much more popular than in Greek times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinNewTestamentTimes\">Palestine in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The nature of furniture in the NT is probably best understood in relation to contemporaneous Roman models. The NT refers to beds in several passages. People brought a paralytic lying on his bed to Jesus (Mt 9:2, 6; Lk 5:18). When the apostles went into Solomon’s portico, people brought the sick to them on beds (Acts 5:15). A Syro-Phoenician woman’s sick child lay on a bed (Mk 7:30). Jesus spoke of setting a lamp on a stand and not placing it under a bed (Mk 4:21; Lk 8:16), and described what would happen to people in bed when the Day of the Lord came (Lk 17:34). In another parable Jesus spoke of a needy person begging for bread at midnight from a friend who was already in bed with his family (Lk 11:7). Beds of the poor and sick were probably only pallets or mattresses (Mk 6:55; Jn 5:8). When people reclined at meals, they would have been lying on a couch (Jn 13:23).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous NT references to tables. Jesus mentioned crumbs falling from a rich man’s table (Mt 15:27; Mk 7:28; Lk 16:21). Jesus overthrew the money changers’ tables in the temple (Mt 21:12; Mk 11:15). Jesus sat with his disciples at a table for the Passover meal (Lk 22:21) and promised his disciples that they would sit at his table in God’s kingdom. The apostles were relieved of serving tables in order to preach (Acts 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>The household lamp is referred to a number of times (Mt 25:1; Mk 4:21). Terra-cotta domestic lamps have been found in abundance in excavations.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FURNITURE Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries. Palestine in Old Testament Times OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references...","summary_en":"FURNITURE Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries. Palestine in Old Testament Times OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56407,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:8-9<\/strong> Jesus healed the sick man <em>instantly<\/em><em>,<\/em> only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to <em>pick up<\/em> his <em>mat and walk<\/em>. • Jesus worked this miracle <em>on the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (<em>Mishnah<\/em> <em>Shabbat<\/em> 7:2). Carrying something such as a <em>sleeping mat<\/em> from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the tradition by obeying Jesus’ command.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:8-9<\/strong> Jesus healed the sick man <em>instantly<\/em><em>,<\/em> only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to <em>pick up<\/em> his <em>mat and walk<\/em>. • Jesus worked this miracle <em>on the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (<em>Mishnah<\/em> <em>Shabbat<\/em> 7:2). Carrying something such as a <em>sleeping mat<\/em> from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the tradition by obeying Jesus’ command.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:8-9 Jesus healed the sick man instantly, only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to pick up his mat and walk. • Jesus worked this miracle on the Sabbath, a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (Mishnah Shabbat 7:2). Carrying something such as a sleeping mat from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the...","summary_en":"5:8-9 Jesus healed the sick man instantly, only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to pick up his mat and walk. • Jesus worked this miracle on the Sabbath, a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (Mishnah Shabbat 7:2). Carrying something such as a sleeping mat from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84033,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:8-9<\/strong> Jesus healed the sick man <em>instantly<\/em><em>,<\/em> only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to <em>pick up<\/em> his <em>mat and walk<\/em>. • Jesus worked this miracle <em>on the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (<em>Mishnah<\/em> <em>Shabbat<\/em> 7:2). Carrying something such as a <em>sleeping mat<\/em> from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the tradition by obeying Jesus’ command.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:8-9<\/strong> Jesus healed the sick man <em>instantly<\/em><em>,<\/em> only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to <em>pick up<\/em> his <em>mat and walk<\/em>. • Jesus worked this miracle <em>on the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (<em>Mishnah<\/em> <em>Shabbat<\/em> 7:2). Carrying something such as a <em>sleeping mat<\/em> from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the tradition by obeying Jesus’ command.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:8-9 Jesus healed the sick man instantly, only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to pick up his mat and walk. • Jesus worked this miracle on the Sabbath, a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (Mishnah Shabbat 7:2). Carrying something such as a sleeping mat from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the...","summary_en":"5:8-9 Jesus healed the sick man instantly, only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to pick up his mat and walk. • Jesus worked this miracle on the Sabbath, a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (Mishnah Shabbat 7:2). Carrying something such as a sleeping mat from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111659,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:8-9<\/strong> Jesus healed the sick man <em>instantly<\/em><em>,<\/em> only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to <em>pick up<\/em> his <em>mat and walk<\/em>. • Jesus worked this miracle <em>on the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (<em>Mishnah<\/em> <em>Shabbat<\/em> 7:2). Carrying something such as a <em>sleeping mat<\/em> from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the tradition by obeying Jesus’ command.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:8-9<\/strong> Jesus healed the sick man <em>instantly<\/em><em>,<\/em> only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to <em>pick up<\/em> his <em>mat and walk<\/em>. • Jesus worked this miracle <em>on the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (<em>Mishnah<\/em> <em>Shabbat<\/em> 7:2). Carrying something such as a <em>sleeping mat<\/em> from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the tradition by obeying Jesus’ command.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:8-9 Jesus healed the sick man instantly, only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to pick up his mat and walk. • Jesus worked this miracle on the Sabbath, a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (Mishnah Shabbat 7:2). Carrying something such as a sleeping mat from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the...","summary_en":"5:8-9 Jesus healed the sick man instantly, only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to pick up his mat and walk. • Jesus worked this miracle on the Sabbath, a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (Mishnah Shabbat 7:2). Carrying something such as a sleeping mat from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139285,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:8-9<\/strong> Jesus healed the sick man <em>instantly<\/em><em>,<\/em> only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to <em>pick up<\/em> his <em>mat and walk<\/em>. • Jesus worked this miracle <em>on the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (<em>Mishnah<\/em> <em>Shabbat<\/em> 7:2). Carrying something such as a <em>sleeping mat<\/em> from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the tradition by obeying Jesus’ command.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>5:8-9<\/strong> Jesus healed the sick man <em>instantly<\/em><em>,<\/em> only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to <em>pick up<\/em> his <em>mat and walk<\/em>. • Jesus worked this miracle <em>on the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (<em>Mishnah<\/em> <em>Shabbat<\/em> 7:2). Carrying something such as a <em>sleeping mat<\/em> from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the tradition by obeying Jesus’ command.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:8-9 Jesus healed the sick man instantly, only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to pick up his mat and walk. • Jesus worked this miracle on the Sabbath, a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (Mishnah Shabbat 7:2). Carrying something such as a sleeping mat from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the...","summary_en":"5:8-9 Jesus healed the sick man instantly, only asking for his obedience. As proof of healing, Jesus told him to pick up his mat and walk. • Jesus worked this miracle on the Sabbath, a weekly day of rest on which all work was prohibited (based on Gen 2:2; Exod 20:8). Jewish tradition outlined thirty-nine categories of work that were not allowed (Mishnah Shabbat 7:2). Carrying something such as a sleeping mat from one place to another was banned (John 5:10). Therefore, the healed man broke the...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":42457,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70083,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97709,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125335,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19470,"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}],"12":[{"id":56408,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>Who said such a thing?<\/em> The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>Who said such a thing?<\/em> The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:12 Who said such a thing? The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.","summary_en":"5:12 Who said such a thing? The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84034,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>Who said such a thing?<\/em> The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>Who said such a thing?<\/em> The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:12 Who said such a thing? The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.","summary_en":"5:12 Who said such a thing? The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111660,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>Who said such a thing?<\/em> The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>Who said such a thing?<\/em> The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:12 Who said such a thing? The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.","summary_en":"5:12 Who said such a thing? The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139286,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>Who said such a thing?<\/em> The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:12<\/strong> <em>Who said such a thing?<\/em> The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:12 Who said such a thing? The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.","summary_en":"5:12 Who said such a thing? The plot ominously turns from miraculous wonder to Sabbath crime, precipitating a request for the identity of the healer who breached tradition.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":56409,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> <em>stop sinning:<\/em> Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> <em>stop sinning:<\/em> Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14 stop sinning: Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.","summary_en":"5:14 stop sinning: Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84035,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> <em>stop sinning:<\/em> Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> <em>stop sinning:<\/em> Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14 stop sinning: Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.","summary_en":"5:14 stop sinning: Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111661,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> <em>stop sinning:<\/em> Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> <em>stop sinning:<\/em> Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14 stop sinning: Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.","summary_en":"5:14 stop sinning: Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139287,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> <em>stop sinning:<\/em> Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:14<\/strong> <em>stop sinning:<\/em> Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:14 stop sinning: Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.","summary_en":"5:14 stop sinning: Though the man had been healed physically, he still needed to learn obedience to the Lord. The man’s next action (5:15) might indicate that he didn’t listen.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":66304,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Persecution","title_en":"Persecution","content_ro":"<h3>Persecution<\/h3>\n<p>Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:12-17; John 16:2). He prepared his followers for such occasions, telling them that the Holy Spirit would give them the needed courage (Luke 12:11-12; 21:14-15; Acts 1:8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Acts documents the persecution of the earliest Christians, beginning with the hostility of the Jewish high council and the attacks of Saul of Tarsus on the early church prior to his encounter with Jesus near Damascus (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-13, 21; 22:4; 26:9-11; see 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13; Phil 3:6). Peter, John, Stephen, James, Paul, and Barnabas all suffered persecution (Acts 4:15-18; 5:17-18; 7:54-60; 12:1-4; 14:5-6). Jesus, in his parable of the farmer and the seed, noted the withering effects of persecution on those with shallow faith (Matt 13:20-21; Mark 4:16-17). Persecution purifies God’s people and gives them the opportunity to conform more closely to the character of Jesus. The apostles’ experiences in Acts bear out Paul’s general statement: “Everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution” (2 Tim 3:12; see Mark 10:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus told his disciples to expect to defend their faith in hostile settings (Matt 10:18-20; Luke 21:12-15), and the apostles and other leaders did so with courage and boldness (e.g., Acts 4:8-12, 31; 5:29-32; 6:8-10; 8:4-40; 9:27). Christians are called to defend their faith courageously and graciously, explaining their convictions to those who ask questions (Col 4:6; 2 Tim 2:24-25; 1 Pet 3:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 18:2-15; 19:1-18; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:1–38:28; Matt 10:16-39; 13:20-21; 23:34-38; 24:9-14; Mark 10:29-31; 13:9-13; Luke 11:47-51; 12:11-12; 21:12-19; John 16:1-4; Acts 4:13-31; 5:17-42; 6:8–8:4; 9:1-31; 12:1-19; 14:1-7; 22:3-29; 23:12-31; 26:9-11; Gal 1:13; 1 Thes 2:14-16; 2 Tim 3:11-14; 1 Pet 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Persecution<\/h3>\n<p>Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:12-17; John 16:2). He prepared his followers for such occasions, telling them that the Holy Spirit would give them the needed courage (Luke 12:11-12; 21:14-15; Acts 1:8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Acts documents the persecution of the earliest Christians, beginning with the hostility of the Jewish high council and the attacks of Saul of Tarsus on the early church prior to his encounter with Jesus near Damascus (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-13, 21; 22:4; 26:9-11; see 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13; Phil 3:6). Peter, John, Stephen, James, Paul, and Barnabas all suffered persecution (Acts 4:15-18; 5:17-18; 7:54-60; 12:1-4; 14:5-6). Jesus, in his parable of the farmer and the seed, noted the withering effects of persecution on those with shallow faith (Matt 13:20-21; Mark 4:16-17). Persecution purifies God’s people and gives them the opportunity to conform more closely to the character of Jesus. The apostles’ experiences in Acts bear out Paul’s general statement: “Everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution” (2 Tim 3:12; see Mark 10:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus told his disciples to expect to defend their faith in hostile settings (Matt 10:18-20; Luke 21:12-15), and the apostles and other leaders did so with courage and boldness (e.g., Acts 4:8-12, 31; 5:29-32; 6:8-10; 8:4-40; 9:27). Christians are called to defend their faith courageously and graciously, explaining their convictions to those who ask questions (Col 4:6; 2 Tim 2:24-25; 1 Pet 3:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 18:2-15; 19:1-18; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:1–38:28; Matt 10:16-39; 13:20-21; 23:34-38; 24:9-14; Mark 10:29-31; 13:9-13; Luke 11:47-51; 12:11-12; 21:12-19; John 16:1-4; Acts 4:13-31; 5:17-42; 6:8–8:4; 9:1-31; 12:1-19; 14:1-7; 22:3-29; 23:12-31; 26:9-11; Gal 1:13; 1 Thes 2:14-16; 2 Tim 3:11-14; 1 Pet 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Persecution Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:1...","summary_en":"Persecution Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67396,"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":93930,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Persecution","title_en":"Persecution","content_ro":"<h3>Persecution<\/h3>\n<p>Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:12-17; John 16:2). He prepared his followers for such occasions, telling them that the Holy Spirit would give them the needed courage (Luke 12:11-12; 21:14-15; Acts 1:8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Acts documents the persecution of the earliest Christians, beginning with the hostility of the Jewish high council and the attacks of Saul of Tarsus on the early church prior to his encounter with Jesus near Damascus (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-13, 21; 22:4; 26:9-11; see 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13; Phil 3:6). Peter, John, Stephen, James, Paul, and Barnabas all suffered persecution (Acts 4:15-18; 5:17-18; 7:54-60; 12:1-4; 14:5-6). Jesus, in his parable of the farmer and the seed, noted the withering effects of persecution on those with shallow faith (Matt 13:20-21; Mark 4:16-17). Persecution purifies God’s people and gives them the opportunity to conform more closely to the character of Jesus. The apostles’ experiences in Acts bear out Paul’s general statement: “Everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution” (2 Tim 3:12; see Mark 10:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus told his disciples to expect to defend their faith in hostile settings (Matt 10:18-20; Luke 21:12-15), and the apostles and other leaders did so with courage and boldness (e.g., Acts 4:8-12, 31; 5:29-32; 6:8-10; 8:4-40; 9:27). Christians are called to defend their faith courageously and graciously, explaining their convictions to those who ask questions (Col 4:6; 2 Tim 2:24-25; 1 Pet 3:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 18:2-15; 19:1-18; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:1–38:28; Matt 10:16-39; 13:20-21; 23:34-38; 24:9-14; Mark 10:29-31; 13:9-13; Luke 11:47-51; 12:11-12; 21:12-19; John 16:1-4; Acts 4:13-31; 5:17-42; 6:8–8:4; 9:1-31; 12:1-19; 14:1-7; 22:3-29; 23:12-31; 26:9-11; Gal 1:13; 1 Thes 2:14-16; 2 Tim 3:11-14; 1 Pet 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Persecution<\/h3>\n<p>Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:12-17; John 16:2). He prepared his followers for such occasions, telling them that the Holy Spirit would give them the needed courage (Luke 12:11-12; 21:14-15; Acts 1:8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Acts documents the persecution of the earliest Christians, beginning with the hostility of the Jewish high council and the attacks of Saul of Tarsus on the early church prior to his encounter with Jesus near Damascus (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-13, 21; 22:4; 26:9-11; see 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13; Phil 3:6). Peter, John, Stephen, James, Paul, and Barnabas all suffered persecution (Acts 4:15-18; 5:17-18; 7:54-60; 12:1-4; 14:5-6). Jesus, in his parable of the farmer and the seed, noted the withering effects of persecution on those with shallow faith (Matt 13:20-21; Mark 4:16-17). Persecution purifies God’s people and gives them the opportunity to conform more closely to the character of Jesus. The apostles’ experiences in Acts bear out Paul’s general statement: “Everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution” (2 Tim 3:12; see Mark 10:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus told his disciples to expect to defend their faith in hostile settings (Matt 10:18-20; Luke 21:12-15), and the apostles and other leaders did so with courage and boldness (e.g., Acts 4:8-12, 31; 5:29-32; 6:8-10; 8:4-40; 9:27). Christians are called to defend their faith courageously and graciously, explaining their convictions to those who ask questions (Col 4:6; 2 Tim 2:24-25; 1 Pet 3:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 18:2-15; 19:1-18; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:1–38:28; Matt 10:16-39; 13:20-21; 23:34-38; 24:9-14; Mark 10:29-31; 13:9-13; Luke 11:47-51; 12:11-12; 21:12-19; John 16:1-4; Acts 4:13-31; 5:17-42; 6:8–8:4; 9:1-31; 12:1-19; 14:1-7; 22:3-29; 23:12-31; 26:9-11; Gal 1:13; 1 Thes 2:14-16; 2 Tim 3:11-14; 1 Pet 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Persecution Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:1...","summary_en":"Persecution Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95022,"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":121556,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Persecution","title_en":"Persecution","content_ro":"<h3>Persecution<\/h3>\n<p>Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:12-17; John 16:2). He prepared his followers for such occasions, telling them that the Holy Spirit would give them the needed courage (Luke 12:11-12; 21:14-15; Acts 1:8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Acts documents the persecution of the earliest Christians, beginning with the hostility of the Jewish high council and the attacks of Saul of Tarsus on the early church prior to his encounter with Jesus near Damascus (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-13, 21; 22:4; 26:9-11; see 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13; Phil 3:6). Peter, John, Stephen, James, Paul, and Barnabas all suffered persecution (Acts 4:15-18; 5:17-18; 7:54-60; 12:1-4; 14:5-6). Jesus, in his parable of the farmer and the seed, noted the withering effects of persecution on those with shallow faith (Matt 13:20-21; Mark 4:16-17). Persecution purifies God’s people and gives them the opportunity to conform more closely to the character of Jesus. The apostles’ experiences in Acts bear out Paul’s general statement: “Everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution” (2 Tim 3:12; see Mark 10:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus told his disciples to expect to defend their faith in hostile settings (Matt 10:18-20; Luke 21:12-15), and the apostles and other leaders did so with courage and boldness (e.g., Acts 4:8-12, 31; 5:29-32; 6:8-10; 8:4-40; 9:27). Christians are called to defend their faith courageously and graciously, explaining their convictions to those who ask questions (Col 4:6; 2 Tim 2:24-25; 1 Pet 3:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 18:2-15; 19:1-18; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:1–38:28; Matt 10:16-39; 13:20-21; 23:34-38; 24:9-14; Mark 10:29-31; 13:9-13; Luke 11:47-51; 12:11-12; 21:12-19; John 16:1-4; Acts 4:13-31; 5:17-42; 6:8–8:4; 9:1-31; 12:1-19; 14:1-7; 22:3-29; 23:12-31; 26:9-11; Gal 1:13; 1 Thes 2:14-16; 2 Tim 3:11-14; 1 Pet 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Persecution<\/h3>\n<p>Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:12-17; John 16:2). He prepared his followers for such occasions, telling them that the Holy Spirit would give them the needed courage (Luke 12:11-12; 21:14-15; Acts 1:8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Acts documents the persecution of the earliest Christians, beginning with the hostility of the Jewish high council and the attacks of Saul of Tarsus on the early church prior to his encounter with Jesus near Damascus (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-13, 21; 22:4; 26:9-11; see 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13; Phil 3:6). Peter, John, Stephen, James, Paul, and Barnabas all suffered persecution (Acts 4:15-18; 5:17-18; 7:54-60; 12:1-4; 14:5-6). Jesus, in his parable of the farmer and the seed, noted the withering effects of persecution on those with shallow faith (Matt 13:20-21; Mark 4:16-17). Persecution purifies God’s people and gives them the opportunity to conform more closely to the character of Jesus. The apostles’ experiences in Acts bear out Paul’s general statement: “Everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution” (2 Tim 3:12; see Mark 10:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus told his disciples to expect to defend their faith in hostile settings (Matt 10:18-20; Luke 21:12-15), and the apostles and other leaders did so with courage and boldness (e.g., Acts 4:8-12, 31; 5:29-32; 6:8-10; 8:4-40; 9:27). Christians are called to defend their faith courageously and graciously, explaining their convictions to those who ask questions (Col 4:6; 2 Tim 2:24-25; 1 Pet 3:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 18:2-15; 19:1-18; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:1–38:28; Matt 10:16-39; 13:20-21; 23:34-38; 24:9-14; Mark 10:29-31; 13:9-13; Luke 11:47-51; 12:11-12; 21:12-19; John 16:1-4; Acts 4:13-31; 5:17-42; 6:8–8:4; 9:1-31; 12:1-19; 14:1-7; 22:3-29; 23:12-31; 26:9-11; Gal 1:13; 1 Thes 2:14-16; 2 Tim 3:11-14; 1 Pet 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Persecution Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:1...","summary_en":"Persecution Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122648,"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":149182,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Persecution","title_en":"Persecution","content_ro":"<h3>Persecution<\/h3>\n<p>Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:12-17; John 16:2). He prepared his followers for such occasions, telling them that the Holy Spirit would give them the needed courage (Luke 12:11-12; 21:14-15; Acts 1:8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Acts documents the persecution of the earliest Christians, beginning with the hostility of the Jewish high council and the attacks of Saul of Tarsus on the early church prior to his encounter with Jesus near Damascus (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-13, 21; 22:4; 26:9-11; see 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13; Phil 3:6). Peter, John, Stephen, James, Paul, and Barnabas all suffered persecution (Acts 4:15-18; 5:17-18; 7:54-60; 12:1-4; 14:5-6). Jesus, in his parable of the farmer and the seed, noted the withering effects of persecution on those with shallow faith (Matt 13:20-21; Mark 4:16-17). Persecution purifies God’s people and gives them the opportunity to conform more closely to the character of Jesus. The apostles’ experiences in Acts bear out Paul’s general statement: “Everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution” (2 Tim 3:12; see Mark 10:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus told his disciples to expect to defend their faith in hostile settings (Matt 10:18-20; Luke 21:12-15), and the apostles and other leaders did so with courage and boldness (e.g., Acts 4:8-12, 31; 5:29-32; 6:8-10; 8:4-40; 9:27). Christians are called to defend their faith courageously and graciously, explaining their convictions to those who ask questions (Col 4:6; 2 Tim 2:24-25; 1 Pet 3:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 18:2-15; 19:1-18; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:1–38:28; Matt 10:16-39; 13:20-21; 23:34-38; 24:9-14; Mark 10:29-31; 13:9-13; Luke 11:47-51; 12:11-12; 21:12-19; John 16:1-4; Acts 4:13-31; 5:17-42; 6:8–8:4; 9:1-31; 12:1-19; 14:1-7; 22:3-29; 23:12-31; 26:9-11; Gal 1:13; 1 Thes 2:14-16; 2 Tim 3:11-14; 1 Pet 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Persecution<\/h3>\n<p>Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:12-17; John 16:2). He prepared his followers for such occasions, telling them that the Holy Spirit would give them the needed courage (Luke 12:11-12; 21:14-15; Acts 1:8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Acts documents the persecution of the earliest Christians, beginning with the hostility of the Jewish high council and the attacks of Saul of Tarsus on the early church prior to his encounter with Jesus near Damascus (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-13, 21; 22:4; 26:9-11; see 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13; Phil 3:6). Peter, John, Stephen, James, Paul, and Barnabas all suffered persecution (Acts 4:15-18; 5:17-18; 7:54-60; 12:1-4; 14:5-6). Jesus, in his parable of the farmer and the seed, noted the withering effects of persecution on those with shallow faith (Matt 13:20-21; Mark 4:16-17). Persecution purifies God’s people and gives them the opportunity to conform more closely to the character of Jesus. The apostles’ experiences in Acts bear out Paul’s general statement: “Everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution” (2 Tim 3:12; see Mark 10:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus told his disciples to expect to defend their faith in hostile settings (Matt 10:18-20; Luke 21:12-15), and the apostles and other leaders did so with courage and boldness (e.g., Acts 4:8-12, 31; 5:29-32; 6:8-10; 8:4-40; 9:27). Christians are called to defend their faith courageously and graciously, explaining their convictions to those who ask questions (Col 4:6; 2 Tim 2:24-25; 1 Pet 3:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 18:2-15; 19:1-18; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:1–38:28; Matt 10:16-39; 13:20-21; 23:34-38; 24:9-14; Mark 10:29-31; 13:9-13; Luke 11:47-51; 12:11-12; 21:12-19; John 16:1-4; Acts 4:13-31; 5:17-42; 6:8–8:4; 9:1-31; 12:1-19; 14:1-7; 22:3-29; 23:12-31; 26:9-11; Gal 1:13; 1 Thes 2:14-16; 2 Tim 3:11-14; 1 Pet 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Persecution Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:1...","summary_en":"Persecution Persecution is a common experience of God’s people. God’s servants have often faced hostility and opposition (e.g., Deut 30:7; 1 Kgs 18:13; Neh 4:1-3; Jer 37:11–38:28; Matt 23:34-37; Luke 11:49-51; 1 Thes 2:14-16). Jesus himself dealt with persecution (Luke 4:28-30; John 5:16). At the end of his earthly life, he endured mocking, beating, and a horrible death by crucifixion, and he told his disciples to expect the same kind of treatment (Matt 10:16-25; 24:9; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150274,"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}],"17":[{"id":14119,"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":32782,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rest","title_en":"Rest","content_ro":"<h3>REST<\/h3>\n<p>Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sabbath<\/span> is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitation of labor to six days precisely because God made all things in six days and rested the seventh day (Ex 20:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical concept of rest, however, is not just past (Creation) and present (weekly) but also future. This future aspect received symbolic expression in the Israelites’ pilgrimage under the leadership of Moses through the wilderness from the bondage of Egypt to the “rest” of the Promised Land. That rest was attained under Joshua, who led them into the land and settled them there (see Jos 23–24).<\/p>\n<p>The 40 years of restless wandering in the wilderness meant that the whole adult generation that set out with Moses perished without entering the Promised Land. This was a judgment they brought upon themselves by their ingratitude and rebelliousness (Nm 14:26-35). Centuries later God warned their descendants against the danger of following this example of hard-heartedness and reaping a similar consequence of not entering his rest: “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts” (Ps 95:7-11). The author of Hebrews cites this passage (Heb 3:7-8; 4:7) as evidence that God’s rest is not a matter of past history but that “the promise of entering his rest remains.” The word “today” indicates that the day of grace is not closed: “For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later of another day. So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God” (4:8-9, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>It is <em>God’s<\/em> rest into which all persons are encouraged to enter. The weekly day of rest is a reminder and a reflection of that rest. The rest of the Israelites in the Promised Land after their wilderness wanderings is a symbol of God’s eternal rest that his people will share. The rest that Christ gives to those who come to him (Mt 11:28) is a foretaste and a guarantee of the divine rest that awaits them. The rest after death of believers who have fallen asleep in Christ is a blissful intensification of the reality of this experience: “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord. . . . They may rest from their labors” (Rv 14:13, <span>rsv<\/span>). But the completion of this rest in its inexpressible fullness will take place at the return of Christ, when at last all who are his will be fully conformed to his likeness (1 Jn 3:2). Salvation will be consummated as they are clothed with imperishable, glorified bodies (2 Cor 5), and the renewed order of creation in which righteousness dwells will be established (2 Pt 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>This will be the climactic point of all history and the moment of the entry of God’s people into the full and unending enjoyment of his rest. The completion of the redemption purchased by Christ at the cross will mean rest and freedom from all sin, and this in turn will mean rest and freedom from all sorrow, pain, suffering, persecution, frustration, injustice, and death (Rv 7:9-17; 21:1-7). The rest of mankind, moreover, will involve the rest of God’s whole creation as it is brought to the perfection of that glorious destiny for which it was intended from the very beginning (cf. Rom 8:19-25).<\/p>\n<p>Rest is not synonymous with inactivity. What God rested from was the work of Creation. He continues constantly to be active, however, in providentially sustaining all that he has created and in the work both of righteous judgment and gracious salvation. Jesus Christ, indeed, in his incarnation, life, death, rising, and glorification, is precisely God in action (2 Cor 5:19). Hence the assertion of Jesus: “My Father is working still, and I am working” (Jn 5:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). What the Christian will rest from is the struggle against the forces of evil and the afflictions by which this present life is marred. The rest into which the Christian will enter will not be a state of uneventful boredom. God himself is dynamic, not static, and so also is his rest.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all that a Christian rests from simply sets him free to be active ceaselessly and joyfully in the service of God, the Creator and Redeemer. In perfect harmony with all God’s works, and in complete fulfillment, Christians exultantly praise and serve the triune God. Joy will be full, without possibility of improvement or deficiency (cf. Rv 4:8-11; 5:8-14; 7:9-12). Such will be the rest without end of that eternal Sabbath that has a morning but no evening: “Let us therefore strive to enter that rest” (Heb 4:11, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Heaven; Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REST<\/h3>\n<p>Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sabbath<\/span> is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitation of labor to six days precisely because God made all things in six days and rested the seventh day (Ex 20:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical concept of rest, however, is not just past (Creation) and present (weekly) but also future. This future aspect received symbolic expression in the Israelites’ pilgrimage under the leadership of Moses through the wilderness from the bondage of Egypt to the “rest” of the Promised Land. That rest was attained under Joshua, who led them into the land and settled them there (see Jos 23–24).<\/p>\n<p>The 40 years of restless wandering in the wilderness meant that the whole adult generation that set out with Moses perished without entering the Promised Land. This was a judgment they brought upon themselves by their ingratitude and rebelliousness (Nm 14:26-35). Centuries later God warned their descendants against the danger of following this example of hard-heartedness and reaping a similar consequence of not entering his rest: “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts” (Ps 95:7-11). The author of Hebrews cites this passage (Heb 3:7-8; 4:7) as evidence that God’s rest is not a matter of past history but that “the promise of entering his rest remains.” The word “today” indicates that the day of grace is not closed: “For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later of another day. So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God” (4:8-9, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>It is <em>God’s<\/em> rest into which all persons are encouraged to enter. The weekly day of rest is a reminder and a reflection of that rest. The rest of the Israelites in the Promised Land after their wilderness wanderings is a symbol of God’s eternal rest that his people will share. The rest that Christ gives to those who come to him (Mt 11:28) is a foretaste and a guarantee of the divine rest that awaits them. The rest after death of believers who have fallen asleep in Christ is a blissful intensification of the reality of this experience: “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord. . . . They may rest from their labors” (Rv 14:13, <span>rsv<\/span>). But the completion of this rest in its inexpressible fullness will take place at the return of Christ, when at last all who are his will be fully conformed to his likeness (1 Jn 3:2). Salvation will be consummated as they are clothed with imperishable, glorified bodies (2 Cor 5), and the renewed order of creation in which righteousness dwells will be established (2 Pt 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>This will be the climactic point of all history and the moment of the entry of God’s people into the full and unending enjoyment of his rest. The completion of the redemption purchased by Christ at the cross will mean rest and freedom from all sin, and this in turn will mean rest and freedom from all sorrow, pain, suffering, persecution, frustration, injustice, and death (Rv 7:9-17; 21:1-7). The rest of mankind, moreover, will involve the rest of God’s whole creation as it is brought to the perfection of that glorious destiny for which it was intended from the very beginning (cf. Rom 8:19-25).<\/p>\n<p>Rest is not synonymous with inactivity. What God rested from was the work of Creation. He continues constantly to be active, however, in providentially sustaining all that he has created and in the work both of righteous judgment and gracious salvation. Jesus Christ, indeed, in his incarnation, life, death, rising, and glorification, is precisely God in action (2 Cor 5:19). Hence the assertion of Jesus: “My Father is working still, and I am working” (Jn 5:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). What the Christian will rest from is the struggle against the forces of evil and the afflictions by which this present life is marred. The rest into which the Christian will enter will not be a state of uneventful boredom. God himself is dynamic, not static, and so also is his rest.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all that a Christian rests from simply sets him free to be active ceaselessly and joyfully in the service of God, the Creator and Redeemer. In perfect harmony with all God’s works, and in complete fulfillment, Christians exultantly praise and serve the triune God. Joy will be full, without possibility of improvement or deficiency (cf. Rv 4:8-11; 5:8-14; 7:9-12). Such will be the rest without end of that eternal Sabbath that has a morning but no evening: “Let us therefore strive to enter that rest” (Heb 4:11, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Heaven; Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REST Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (sabbath is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitati...","summary_en":"REST Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (sabbath is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitati...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56410,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:17<\/strong> <em>My Father is always working, and so am I:<\/em> Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:17<\/strong> <em>My Father is always working, and so am I:<\/em> Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:17 My Father is always working, and so am I: Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.","summary_en":"5:17 My Father is always working, and so am I: Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84036,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:17<\/strong> <em>My Father is always working, and so am I:<\/em> Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:17<\/strong> <em>My Father is always working, and so am I:<\/em> Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:17 My Father is always working, and so am I: Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.","summary_en":"5:17 My Father is always working, and so am I: Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111662,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:17<\/strong> <em>My Father is always working, and so am I:<\/em> Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:17<\/strong> <em>My Father is always working, and so am I:<\/em> Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:17 My Father is always working, and so am I: Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.","summary_en":"5:17 My Father is always working, and so am I: Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139288,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:17<\/strong> <em>My Father is always working, and so am I:<\/em> Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:17<\/strong> <em>My Father is always working, and so am I:<\/em> Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:17 My Father is always working, and so am I: Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.","summary_en":"5:17 My Father is always working, and so am I: Although work was prohibited on the Sabbath, even rabbis agreed that God worked on the Sabbath in giving life (births) and in taking life (deaths). The heart of Jesus’ defense was to compare himself to God; the Jewish leaders objected to this claim of divine privilege.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":19794,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jew","title_en":"Jew","content_ro":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","summary_en":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":16960,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Humility","title_en":"Humility","content_ro":"<h3>HUMILITY<\/h3>\n<p>A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical literature there is not a clear distinction between humility and meekness or patience. In early stages of Israel’s history, the humble were identified as the poor, the afflicted, and the powerless. The Lord delivers the humble but brings down the proud (1 Sm 2:7; 2 Sm 22:28). Before the power and glory of God, the patriarch Abraham confessed that he was but dust and ashes (Gn 18:27). Israel began as a nation subjected to slavery and knew themselves as a people chosen not because of numerical strength or material wealth but because of God’s love (Dt 7:7-8). By attributing the source of all wealth and power to the Lord, those two major sources of human pride and arrogance are brought under control (cf. Jer 9:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The humble poor are the constant concern of the Lord (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt 15:4, 7). Consequently, the humility of the poor became the symbol of the righteous God-fearer (Nm 12:3). In the development of the concept of humility in the OT, humility is nearly equated with righteousness and is identified, along with justice and mercy, as the requirement of God (Mi 6:8). In the Psalms particularly, “the afflicted” is almost a technical term for the righteous (Pss 22:26; 25:9; 147:6).<\/p>\n<p>In addition, humility is the appropriate response of the sinner in the presence of the holiness of God. The prophet Isaiah, confronted by the glory of God in the temple, cried, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man” (Is 6:5). Thus humility became more of a character trait than a term that reflected a state of material poverty or affliction. It became a concept reflective of the essence of piety and godliness expected of all people who have God as their Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Only rarely in the NT does humility refer to an objective condition of poverty, affliction, or oppression.The humility motif is developed in connection with Jesus as Messiah. The religious ideal of humility that the OT attributed to the coming King certainly applied to Jesus (Zec 9:9; cf. Mt 21:4-5). As Son of God, Jesus took no thought for himself but lived a life of obedience and trust in God the Father. The apostle Paul attributed to the incarnate Son of God a self-emptying by which he “humbled himself” and took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:5-8). Jesus’ character exhibited no pride or arrogance.<\/p>\n<p>Though bold in the face of hypocrisy and unflinching in his repudiation of pretentious religion, Jesus was “gentle and humble in heart” (Mt 11:29). He could, therefore, issue a severe warning against desire for status and openly rebuke the Pharisees for their violence against the poor and oppressed (Lk 14:11; Mt 23:12). At the same time, he was humble before those whose servant and helper he had become (Lk 22:27; Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28). The highest dignity of Jesus and his willingness to accept the cross in submission to the Father’s will are one. So his teaching on poverty of spirit rang true as a testimony of his own life. He ascribed all glory to his Father and lived in total dependence upon him (Jn 5:19; 6:38; 7:15; 8:28, 50; 14:10, 24). By washing his disciples’ feet, he assumed the role of servant with no loss of dignity or self-worth. And he set forth such service as a model of a life that finds happiness in preferring others over one’s self (Jn 13:1-20; Phil 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, disciples of Jesus are also summoned to a life of humility. Turning their backs on status, security, and success, Christians seek an opportunity to gain themselves in serving others. Humility, thus, is the all-embracing life principle by which love seeks the good of others, and thus fulfills the law (cf. Rom 12:10; 13:8-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HUMILITY<\/h3>\n<p>A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical literature there is not a clear distinction between humility and meekness or patience. In early stages of Israel’s history, the humble were identified as the poor, the afflicted, and the powerless. The Lord delivers the humble but brings down the proud (1 Sm 2:7; 2 Sm 22:28). Before the power and glory of God, the patriarch Abraham confessed that he was but dust and ashes (Gn 18:27). Israel began as a nation subjected to slavery and knew themselves as a people chosen not because of numerical strength or material wealth but because of God’s love (Dt 7:7-8). By attributing the source of all wealth and power to the Lord, those two major sources of human pride and arrogance are brought under control (cf. Jer 9:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The humble poor are the constant concern of the Lord (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt 15:4, 7). Consequently, the humility of the poor became the symbol of the righteous God-fearer (Nm 12:3). In the development of the concept of humility in the OT, humility is nearly equated with righteousness and is identified, along with justice and mercy, as the requirement of God (Mi 6:8). In the Psalms particularly, “the afflicted” is almost a technical term for the righteous (Pss 22:26; 25:9; 147:6).<\/p>\n<p>In addition, humility is the appropriate response of the sinner in the presence of the holiness of God. The prophet Isaiah, confronted by the glory of God in the temple, cried, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man” (Is 6:5). Thus humility became more of a character trait than a term that reflected a state of material poverty or affliction. It became a concept reflective of the essence of piety and godliness expected of all people who have God as their Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Only rarely in the NT does humility refer to an objective condition of poverty, affliction, or oppression.The humility motif is developed in connection with Jesus as Messiah. The religious ideal of humility that the OT attributed to the coming King certainly applied to Jesus (Zec 9:9; cf. Mt 21:4-5). As Son of God, Jesus took no thought for himself but lived a life of obedience and trust in God the Father. The apostle Paul attributed to the incarnate Son of God a self-emptying by which he “humbled himself” and took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:5-8). Jesus’ character exhibited no pride or arrogance.<\/p>\n<p>Though bold in the face of hypocrisy and unflinching in his repudiation of pretentious religion, Jesus was “gentle and humble in heart” (Mt 11:29). He could, therefore, issue a severe warning against desire for status and openly rebuke the Pharisees for their violence against the poor and oppressed (Lk 14:11; Mt 23:12). At the same time, he was humble before those whose servant and helper he had become (Lk 22:27; Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28). The highest dignity of Jesus and his willingness to accept the cross in submission to the Father’s will are one. So his teaching on poverty of spirit rang true as a testimony of his own life. He ascribed all glory to his Father and lived in total dependence upon him (Jn 5:19; 6:38; 7:15; 8:28, 50; 14:10, 24). By washing his disciples’ feet, he assumed the role of servant with no loss of dignity or self-worth. And he set forth such service as a model of a life that finds happiness in preferring others over one’s self (Jn 13:1-20; Phil 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, disciples of Jesus are also summoned to a life of humility. Turning their backs on status, security, and success, Christians seek an opportunity to gain themselves in serving others. Humility, thus, is the all-embracing life principle by which love seeks the good of others, and thus fulfills the law (cf. Rom 12:10; 13:8-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HUMILITY A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute depen...","summary_en":"HUMILITY A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute depen...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20212,"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":56411,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:19-30<\/strong> Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing <em>only what . . . the Father<\/em> willed.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:19-30<\/strong> Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing <em>only what . . . the Father<\/em> willed.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:19-30 Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing only what . . . the Father willed.","summary_en":"5:19-30 Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing only what . . . the Father willed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84037,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:19-30<\/strong> Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing <em>only what . . . the Father<\/em> willed.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:19-30<\/strong> Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing <em>only what . . . the Father<\/em> willed.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:19-30 Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing only what . . . the Father willed.","summary_en":"5:19-30 Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing only what . . . the Father willed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111663,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:19-30<\/strong> Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing <em>only what . . . the Father<\/em> willed.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:19-30<\/strong> Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing <em>only what . . . the Father<\/em> willed.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:19-30 Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing only what . . . the Father willed.","summary_en":"5:19-30 Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing only what . . . the Father willed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139289,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:19-30<\/strong> Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing <em>only what . . . the Father<\/em> willed.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:19-30<\/strong> Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing <em>only what . . . the Father<\/em> willed.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:19-30 Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing only what . . . the Father willed.","summary_en":"5:19-30 Jesus claimed that his work on the Sabbath was the same as God’s work on the Sabbath. Jesus claimed to be equal with God, doing the things God does. Yet he submitted to God’s will, doing only what . . . the Father willed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65443,"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":93069,"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":120695,"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":148321,"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}],"21":[{"id":4730,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23224,"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":56412,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:21<\/strong> Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he <em>gives life<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:21<\/strong> Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he <em>gives life<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:21 Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he gives life.","summary_en":"5:21 Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he gives life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84038,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:21<\/strong> Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he <em>gives life<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:21<\/strong> Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he <em>gives life<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:21 Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he gives life.","summary_en":"5:21 Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he gives life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111664,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:21<\/strong> Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he <em>gives life<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:21<\/strong> Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he <em>gives life<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:21 Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he gives life.","summary_en":"5:21 Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he gives life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139290,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:21<\/strong> Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he <em>gives life<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:21<\/strong> Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he <em>gives life<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:21 Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he gives life.","summary_en":"5:21 Most Jews firmly believed in resurrection but viewed it as something God alone could accomplish. Jesus claimed that he gives life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65255,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92881,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120507,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148133,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":8965,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Place of the Dead","title_en":"Place of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>DEAD, Place of the<\/h3>\n<p>Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, one descends to Sheol (often translated as “grave,” “hell,” “pit,” or simply “the dead”), which at times means merely that one is laid in a grave (Nm 16:30, 33), but more often indicates an underworld. The abode of the dead is pictured as a place beneath the earth to which one “goes down” (Gn 42:38; Prv 15:24; Ez 26:20) and as a place of gloomy darkness (Jb 10:21-22), silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17), and forgetfulness (Ps 88:12). God is not remembered there and his praises are never sung (Pss 6:5; 30:9; 115:17). Even God himself, it was believed, does not remember those who are there (Ps 88:5, 11; Is 38:18). The dead were seen as permanently cut off from contact with the Lord and from participating in his activity in history. Even though the border between life and death was considered fluid (as shown by a resurrection in 2 Kgs 4:32-37 and by Samuel’s ghost in 1 Sm 28:7-25), communication with the dead was forbidden to the Jews (Dt 18:11). (Worshiping the dead was a common practice in the nations surrounding Israel.)<\/p>\n<p>Although one’s fate in the underworld could not properly be called life, it was a kind of existence, perhaps even in the company of one’s countrymen and ancestors (Gn 25:8; Ez 32:17-30). The realm of the dead was not beyond the reach of God’s power (Ps 139:8; Am 9:2; Jon 2:2). Although Sheol was pictured as a hungry monster wolfing down the living (Prv 27:20; 30:16), God’s power could save one from its grasp (Pss 49:15; 86:13). By the end of the OT period, there was even hope that one would finally be delivered from Sheol (Jb 14:13-22; 19:25-27; Pss 49:15; 73:23-28), although only Daniel expressed that hope clearly (Dn 12:1-2). So although the ancient Hebrews never looked forward to death in the same way that the apostle Paul could in the NT (2 Cor 5:1-8; Phil 1:21-23), nevertheless they did come to understand that death was not a hopeless state.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheIntertestamentalWritings\">In the Intertestamental Writings<\/p>\n<p>Between the exile and the beginning of the NT period (586 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 30, overlapping with the end of the OT), contact with the religions of Persia and Greece stimulated the Jews to clarify their ideas about life after death. When the OT was translated into Greek, the Greek name for the underworld, “hades,” was used to translate the Hebrew “Sheol.” In the NT, hades was carried over to become the common name for the abode of the dead.<\/p>\n<p>Along with new names came new ideas. Many different notions circulated about the place of the dead. A common one appears in the pseudepigraphal 1 Enoch 22, where the dead are said to be kept in hollow places in a great mountain waiting for the final judgment. One relatively pleasant section was reserved for the righteous and one full of torments for the wicked. Other writers continued the OT concept of hades or Sheol as a place of separation from God and from happiness (Ecclus 14:12, 16; 17:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>During that period, the Jews also began to use a new term, “Gehenna” (Hebrew “Hinnom”), the name of a valley south of Jerusalem. The valley was noted in the OT period for the abomination of child sacrifices (2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6; 23:10) and in the NT period for its smoldering garbage. Gehenna became a designation for the final place of the wicked dead, a place of fiery torment (1 Enoch 90:20-27; 2 Esd 7:70). Over against that place of punishment stood “paradise” (a Persian name for a pleasure garden), a place where the righteous would enjoy blessedness.<\/p>\n<p>All those concepts—hades, Gehenna, paradise—were molded by NT writers into forms most appropriate to the revelation of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although the NT uses a variety of terms for the abode of the dead, it contains surprisingly few references to it—about 35 verses in all. Those passages are concentrated in the Gospels and the book of Revelation. The apostle Paul said a lot about heaven, but only Jesus and John said much about hell.<\/p>\n<p>The word “hades” is attributed to Jesus only once, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:23). In that parable hades is a place of torment where the wicked go at death. The torment is described as a “flame” that afflicts a person physically despite bodily death. All comfort is refused to those in agony.<\/p>\n<p>Although the wicked go to hades as soon as they die, their ultimate destination is Gehenna, a place of fire and worms, both indicating corruption (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 18:9; Mk 9:48, quoting from Is 66:24). Jesus also referred to Gehenna as “the outer darkness” where there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30). Evidently, after the final judgment, the wicked are sent there at the command of Christ (Jn 5:22, 27; Acts 10:42; 17:31; 2 Tm 4:1). That place of torment picks up the negative side of the OT concept of Sheol as a place of separation from God.<\/p>\n<p>As a preacher of repentance, Jesus stressed the danger of Gehenna. He had much less to say about the place of the righteous when they die. Ultimately, though, the righteous would enter into “the kingdom,” instead of Gehenna, after the last judgment (Mt 25:34). Jesus twice indicated that the righteous enter a blessed state immediately at death. Luke 16:22 refers to the dead Lazarus as being in “Abraham’s bosom,” a place of comfort and peace. Luke 23:43 calls the same place paradise in a promise that the dying thief would join Jesus there at death. Paul’s wording about paradise seems to align it with heaven (2 Cor 12:2-3), and John associates paradise with the new heaven and new earth (Rv 2:7; 21:1-2; 22:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Paul and other writers of the NT epistles had little to say about the abode of the wicked dead. Paul spoke only in passing of “the abyss”—his term for the pit of Sheol (Rom 10:7). His reference to Christ’s descent to the “lower parts of the earth” (Eph 4:9) is probably only his way of saying that Christ, having died, went to the place of the dead. (“The lowest earth” was a term used by Jewish rabbis for Sheol\/hades\/Gehenna.) Peter spoke of Christ’s going in “spirit” after his death to some “prison” where he “preached to the spirits” (1 Pt 3:18-20). Interpretations of that passage differ. Some think that Christ entered hades and preached to the fallen angels of Noah’s day (“sons of God,” Gn 6:1-4), not that he preached to imprisoned human spirits. In 2 Peter 2:4 the prison for spirits (usually translated “hell”) comes from “Tartarus,” another Greek name for the underworld.<\/p>\n<p>Paul had much to say about the abode of the righteous dead. In his earliest letters he never mentioned their location, only that they would be resurrected (1 Cor 15; 1 Thes 4:13-17). After facing almost certain death himself (2 Cor 1:8-11), he began to discuss where the dead “went.” To die means to be with Christ, Paul said, and thus is better than life (Phil 1:23). To be “away from the body” is to be “at home with the Lord” (2 Cor 5:8). Paul probably meant that the righteous dead went directly to paradise to be with Jesus (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4, where Paul called paradise “the third heaven”). Death has absolutely no power to separate Christians from Christ (Rom 8:38-39). Instead, it brings them into the presence of God.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation contains much about the abode of the dead, especially the wicked dead. It uses two names for that place: “the abyss,” the home or prison of all evil spirits; and “hades,” the name for the place of the human dead. From the abyss (or bottomless pit) come the demonic forms that torment humanity (Rv 9:1-11) and the satanic “beast,” who kills the two witnesses and carries the “great prostitute” on its back (11:7; 17). There Satan himself will be imprisoned (20:2-3). Jesus described it as a place prepared for the devil and his angels (cf. Mt 25:41). The good news for Christians is that the abyss, or hades, is not an autonomous realm. The book of Revelation begins with Jesus’ announcement that he has the keys to hades (Rv 1:18), and in the end he will force it to give up its dead (20:13). Until then, the key to the abyss is not in the hand of Satan, but hangs on a heavenly key ring to be distributed only to the messengers of God (9:1; 20:1). In the end, hades, death, and the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), where they will suffer eternal torment (19:20; 20:10, 14-15; 21:8).<\/p>\n<p>John, the writer of the Revelation, agreed with Paul that the righteous will not share the fate of the wicked at death. Instead of going to hades, they go to heaven. The martyrs appear under the altar, calling to God to avenge them (Rv 6:9-11). In another image innumerable Christians appear before the throne of God, praising him (7:9-17). Those believers, shepherded by Christ himself, suffer no hunger, thirst, discomfort, or sorrow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>In summary, the place of the dead began in the OT as an undifferentiated, hazy idea of a place of separation from life and God. Later writers came to see that instead of one place for all (Sheol), there must be two. According to Christian teaching, the wicked enter the underworld, hades, a place of torment, where they suffer until the time of judgment; ultimately they will be cast into Gehenna, the lake of fire. Christ—not the devil—is in control of hades, as he is of the rest of creation. The righteous do not go to hades, but go directly to paradise (“Abraham’s bosom” or heaven). There they are with Christ; faith has become sight, suffering has become blessedness, and prayer has become praise. Christians believe that death, although fearful as the “last enemy,” has no torment for them. It has no power to separate them from their Lord. Rather, it brings them face-to-face with the One they love.<\/p>\n<p>This meeting may occur as soon as one dies or as soon as one is resurrected—the intervening time is of no consequence, because it is nothing more than just a time of sleep. In other words, the very next experience after death for the believer will be that of meeting Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Both Old and New Testaments speak of death as sleep. Commonly in the OT, when a person dies, he is said to go to sleep with his fathers (e.g., Dt 31:16; 2 Sm 7:12). Jesus himself spoke of death as sleep (Mt 9:24; Jn 11:11). So did the apostle Paul (1 Cor 11:30; 15:20, 51; 1 Thes 4:14). At least in some of these references it would seem that it is the temporary nature of death that is the reason why it is spoken of as sleep. Even in the OT passage Daniel 12:2, it is said that death is a sleep, until the dead rise up—some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gehenna; Hades; Heaven; Hell; Intermediate State; Paradise; Sheol.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEAD, Place of the<\/h3>\n<p>Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, one descends to Sheol (often translated as “grave,” “hell,” “pit,” or simply “the dead”), which at times means merely that one is laid in a grave (Nm 16:30, 33), but more often indicates an underworld. The abode of the dead is pictured as a place beneath the earth to which one “goes down” (Gn 42:38; Prv 15:24; Ez 26:20) and as a place of gloomy darkness (Jb 10:21-22), silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17), and forgetfulness (Ps 88:12). God is not remembered there and his praises are never sung (Pss 6:5; 30:9; 115:17). Even God himself, it was believed, does not remember those who are there (Ps 88:5, 11; Is 38:18). The dead were seen as permanently cut off from contact with the Lord and from participating in his activity in history. Even though the border between life and death was considered fluid (as shown by a resurrection in 2 Kgs 4:32-37 and by Samuel’s ghost in 1 Sm 28:7-25), communication with the dead was forbidden to the Jews (Dt 18:11). (Worshiping the dead was a common practice in the nations surrounding Israel.)<\/p>\n<p>Although one’s fate in the underworld could not properly be called life, it was a kind of existence, perhaps even in the company of one’s countrymen and ancestors (Gn 25:8; Ez 32:17-30). The realm of the dead was not beyond the reach of God’s power (Ps 139:8; Am 9:2; Jon 2:2). Although Sheol was pictured as a hungry monster wolfing down the living (Prv 27:20; 30:16), God’s power could save one from its grasp (Pss 49:15; 86:13). By the end of the OT period, there was even hope that one would finally be delivered from Sheol (Jb 14:13-22; 19:25-27; Pss 49:15; 73:23-28), although only Daniel expressed that hope clearly (Dn 12:1-2). So although the ancient Hebrews never looked forward to death in the same way that the apostle Paul could in the NT (2 Cor 5:1-8; Phil 1:21-23), nevertheless they did come to understand that death was not a hopeless state.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheIntertestamentalWritings\">In the Intertestamental Writings<\/p>\n<p>Between the exile and the beginning of the NT period (586 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 30, overlapping with the end of the OT), contact with the religions of Persia and Greece stimulated the Jews to clarify their ideas about life after death. When the OT was translated into Greek, the Greek name for the underworld, “hades,” was used to translate the Hebrew “Sheol.” In the NT, hades was carried over to become the common name for the abode of the dead.<\/p>\n<p>Along with new names came new ideas. Many different notions circulated about the place of the dead. A common one appears in the pseudepigraphal 1 Enoch 22, where the dead are said to be kept in hollow places in a great mountain waiting for the final judgment. One relatively pleasant section was reserved for the righteous and one full of torments for the wicked. Other writers continued the OT concept of hades or Sheol as a place of separation from God and from happiness (Ecclus 14:12, 16; 17:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>During that period, the Jews also began to use a new term, “Gehenna” (Hebrew “Hinnom”), the name of a valley south of Jerusalem. The valley was noted in the OT period for the abomination of child sacrifices (2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6; 23:10) and in the NT period for its smoldering garbage. Gehenna became a designation for the final place of the wicked dead, a place of fiery torment (1 Enoch 90:20-27; 2 Esd 7:70). Over against that place of punishment stood “paradise” (a Persian name for a pleasure garden), a place where the righteous would enjoy blessedness.<\/p>\n<p>All those concepts—hades, Gehenna, paradise—were molded by NT writers into forms most appropriate to the revelation of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although the NT uses a variety of terms for the abode of the dead, it contains surprisingly few references to it—about 35 verses in all. Those passages are concentrated in the Gospels and the book of Revelation. The apostle Paul said a lot about heaven, but only Jesus and John said much about hell.<\/p>\n<p>The word “hades” is attributed to Jesus only once, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:23). In that parable hades is a place of torment where the wicked go at death. The torment is described as a “flame” that afflicts a person physically despite bodily death. All comfort is refused to those in agony.<\/p>\n<p>Although the wicked go to hades as soon as they die, their ultimate destination is Gehenna, a place of fire and worms, both indicating corruption (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 18:9; Mk 9:48, quoting from Is 66:24). Jesus also referred to Gehenna as “the outer darkness” where there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30). Evidently, after the final judgment, the wicked are sent there at the command of Christ (Jn 5:22, 27; Acts 10:42; 17:31; 2 Tm 4:1). That place of torment picks up the negative side of the OT concept of Sheol as a place of separation from God.<\/p>\n<p>As a preacher of repentance, Jesus stressed the danger of Gehenna. He had much less to say about the place of the righteous when they die. Ultimately, though, the righteous would enter into “the kingdom,” instead of Gehenna, after the last judgment (Mt 25:34). Jesus twice indicated that the righteous enter a blessed state immediately at death. Luke 16:22 refers to the dead Lazarus as being in “Abraham’s bosom,” a place of comfort and peace. Luke 23:43 calls the same place paradise in a promise that the dying thief would join Jesus there at death. Paul’s wording about paradise seems to align it with heaven (2 Cor 12:2-3), and John associates paradise with the new heaven and new earth (Rv 2:7; 21:1-2; 22:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Paul and other writers of the NT epistles had little to say about the abode of the wicked dead. Paul spoke only in passing of “the abyss”—his term for the pit of Sheol (Rom 10:7). His reference to Christ’s descent to the “lower parts of the earth” (Eph 4:9) is probably only his way of saying that Christ, having died, went to the place of the dead. (“The lowest earth” was a term used by Jewish rabbis for Sheol\/hades\/Gehenna.) Peter spoke of Christ’s going in “spirit” after his death to some “prison” where he “preached to the spirits” (1 Pt 3:18-20). Interpretations of that passage differ. Some think that Christ entered hades and preached to the fallen angels of Noah’s day (“sons of God,” Gn 6:1-4), not that he preached to imprisoned human spirits. In 2 Peter 2:4 the prison for spirits (usually translated “hell”) comes from “Tartarus,” another Greek name for the underworld.<\/p>\n<p>Paul had much to say about the abode of the righteous dead. In his earliest letters he never mentioned their location, only that they would be resurrected (1 Cor 15; 1 Thes 4:13-17). After facing almost certain death himself (2 Cor 1:8-11), he began to discuss where the dead “went.” To die means to be with Christ, Paul said, and thus is better than life (Phil 1:23). To be “away from the body” is to be “at home with the Lord” (2 Cor 5:8). Paul probably meant that the righteous dead went directly to paradise to be with Jesus (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4, where Paul called paradise “the third heaven”). Death has absolutely no power to separate Christians from Christ (Rom 8:38-39). Instead, it brings them into the presence of God.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation contains much about the abode of the dead, especially the wicked dead. It uses two names for that place: “the abyss,” the home or prison of all evil spirits; and “hades,” the name for the place of the human dead. From the abyss (or bottomless pit) come the demonic forms that torment humanity (Rv 9:1-11) and the satanic “beast,” who kills the two witnesses and carries the “great prostitute” on its back (11:7; 17). There Satan himself will be imprisoned (20:2-3). Jesus described it as a place prepared for the devil and his angels (cf. Mt 25:41). The good news for Christians is that the abyss, or hades, is not an autonomous realm. The book of Revelation begins with Jesus’ announcement that he has the keys to hades (Rv 1:18), and in the end he will force it to give up its dead (20:13). Until then, the key to the abyss is not in the hand of Satan, but hangs on a heavenly key ring to be distributed only to the messengers of God (9:1; 20:1). In the end, hades, death, and the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), where they will suffer eternal torment (19:20; 20:10, 14-15; 21:8).<\/p>\n<p>John, the writer of the Revelation, agreed with Paul that the righteous will not share the fate of the wicked at death. Instead of going to hades, they go to heaven. The martyrs appear under the altar, calling to God to avenge them (Rv 6:9-11). In another image innumerable Christians appear before the throne of God, praising him (7:9-17). Those believers, shepherded by Christ himself, suffer no hunger, thirst, discomfort, or sorrow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>In summary, the place of the dead began in the OT as an undifferentiated, hazy idea of a place of separation from life and God. Later writers came to see that instead of one place for all (Sheol), there must be two. According to Christian teaching, the wicked enter the underworld, hades, a place of torment, where they suffer until the time of judgment; ultimately they will be cast into Gehenna, the lake of fire. Christ—not the devil—is in control of hades, as he is of the rest of creation. The righteous do not go to hades, but go directly to paradise (“Abraham’s bosom” or heaven). There they are with Christ; faith has become sight, suffering has become blessedness, and prayer has become praise. Christians believe that death, although fearful as the “last enemy,” has no torment for them. It has no power to separate them from their Lord. Rather, it brings them face-to-face with the One they love.<\/p>\n<p>This meeting may occur as soon as one dies or as soon as one is resurrected—the intervening time is of no consequence, because it is nothing more than just a time of sleep. In other words, the very next experience after death for the believer will be that of meeting Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Both Old and New Testaments speak of death as sleep. Commonly in the OT, when a person dies, he is said to go to sleep with his fathers (e.g., Dt 31:16; 2 Sm 7:12). Jesus himself spoke of death as sleep (Mt 9:24; Jn 11:11). So did the apostle Paul (1 Cor 11:30; 15:20, 51; 1 Thes 4:14). At least in some of these references it would seem that it is the temporary nature of death that is the reason why it is spoken of as sleep. Even in the OT passage Daniel 12:2, it is said that death is a sleep, until the dead rise up—some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gehenna; Hades; Heaven; Hell; Intermediate State; Paradise; Sheol.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEAD, Place of the Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT. In the Old Testament The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, ...","summary_en":"DEAD, Place of the Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT. In the Old Testament The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56413,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the <em>absolute authority to judge<\/em><em>,<\/em> which belongs to God alone.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the <em>absolute authority to judge<\/em><em>,<\/em> which belongs to God alone.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:22 In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the absolute authority to judge, which belongs to God alone.","summary_en":"5:22 In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the absolute authority to judge, which belongs to God alone.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84039,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the <em>absolute authority to judge<\/em><em>,<\/em> which belongs to God alone.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the <em>absolute authority to judge<\/em><em>,<\/em> which belongs to God alone.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:22 In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the absolute authority to judge, which belongs to God alone.","summary_en":"5:22 In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the absolute authority to judge, which belongs to God alone.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111665,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the <em>absolute authority to judge<\/em><em>,<\/em> which belongs to God alone.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the <em>absolute authority to judge<\/em><em>,<\/em> which belongs to God alone.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:22 In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the absolute authority to judge, which belongs to God alone.","summary_en":"5:22 In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the absolute authority to judge, which belongs to God alone.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139291,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the <em>absolute authority to judge<\/em><em>,<\/em> which belongs to God alone.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the <em>absolute authority to judge<\/em><em>,<\/em> which belongs to God alone.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:22 In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the absolute authority to judge, which belongs to God alone.","summary_en":"5:22 In addition to giving life, Jesus claimed the absolute authority to judge, which belongs to God alone.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67805,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","title_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","summary_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95431,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","title_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","summary_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123057,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","title_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","summary_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150683,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","title_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","summary_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":56414,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:23","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:23<\/strong> <em>the Father . . . sent him:<\/em> In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:23<\/strong> <em>the Father . . . sent him:<\/em> In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:23 the Father . . . sent him: In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.","summary_en":"5:23 the Father . . . sent him: In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84040,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:23","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:23<\/strong> <em>the Father . . . sent him:<\/em> In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:23<\/strong> <em>the Father . . . sent him:<\/em> In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:23 the Father . . . sent him: In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.","summary_en":"5:23 the Father . . . sent him: In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111666,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:23","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:23<\/strong> <em>the Father . . . sent him:<\/em> In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:23<\/strong> <em>the Father . . . sent him:<\/em> In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:23 the Father . . . sent him: In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.","summary_en":"5:23 the Father . . . sent him: In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139292,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:23","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:23<\/strong> <em>the Father . . . sent him:<\/em> In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:23<\/strong> <em>the Father . . . sent him:<\/em> In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:23 the Father . . . sent him: In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.","summary_en":"5:23 the Father . . . sent him: In the ancient world, a person could send an authorized representative to seal a contract or make an authoritative decision. Jesus claimed to be God’s representative, so obeying Jesus is the same as obeying God, and dishonoring him is dishonoring God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61566,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pure Worship","title_en":"Pure Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","summary_en":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89192,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pure Worship","title_en":"Pure Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","summary_en":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116818,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pure Worship","title_en":"Pure Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","summary_en":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144444,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pure Worship","title_en":"Pure Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","summary_en":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":9082,"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":19693,"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":21363,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judgment","title_en":"Judgment","content_ro":"<h3>JUDGMENT<\/h3>\n<p>Concept in Scripture closely related to the concept of God’s justice. In all his relationships God acts justly and morally. Human beings, created by God, have a moral dimension, so that they may positively respond to God’s righteous demands in their lives. Divine judgment, involving God’s approval or disapproval upon each human act, is a natural consequence of the Creator-creature relationship. Thus judgment, simply defined, is the divine response to human activity. God the Creator must also be God the Judge. Since God is just, he responds with either punishment or reward to what each person does. A human’s moral accountability to God (a quality not shared by the rest of creation) is an essential ingredient of being created in God’s image. Creation in the divine image means that God and man can communicate with each other in such a way that all people are able to understand God’s moral requirements and willingly respond to them. Among the various positive commands given to people in his original creation—including marriage, the subduing of the earth, and enjoyment of the Garden of Eden—was the negative command prohibiting the eating of the fruit from one tree. Defiance of this prohibition carried the threat of death as punishment (Gn 2:16-17). Genesis 3 contains the account of God’s first judgment, the one against Adam. He was punished by death since he had not lived within the moral regulations set by God (3:17-19). In a purely technical sense, judgment includes God’s approval upon acts that please him; more frequently, judgment is understood negatively in the sense that God punishes those who violate his commands. Since the fall, all human activity stands under God’s negative judgment (Rom 2:12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudgmentinThisLife\">Judgment in This Life<\/p>\n<p>The Christian idea of the atonement, that Christ died for sin in the place of man, depends on the premise that God holds humans accountable for their sins. But God sent his Son to deal with this problem. The Son willingly placed himself under God’s judgment, and in people’s place he received the divine punishment (Gal 3:13). Christ’s death for sin may therefore be considered the extreme manifestation of divine judgment. God as judge visits upon the soul of Christ in his crucifixion the total divine judgment against sin.<\/p>\n<p>Through faith, brought about by the Holy Spirit and fed by the Word, a believer becomes one with Christ and thus escapes divine judgment and is rescued from punishment (Rom 3:22). Those who, by faith, share in the benefits of Christ’s death stand before the divine Judge and receive a verdict of “not guilty,” and instead of punishment and divine retribution, receive a sentence of eternal life. Jesus says of those who believe in him that they have already passed through judgment, have escaped death, and are already sharing in eternal life (Jn 5:24).<\/p>\n<p>Though sins have been atoned for by Christ, each person—believer and unbeliever alike—still suffers certain consequences of his or her sins here in this life. For every human action there is a divine reaction (Rom 2:6). Paul speaks about the conscience, which carries out a series of judgments even upon the actions of those who do not know the true God (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>Governments are also manifestations of divine judgment upon man’s public performances with respect to the law. Civil justice, though often corrupted, is a means through which God carries out temporal judgment upon any infringement of the law in this life (Rom 13:1-2). Public crimes against society are not the only sins subject to divine judgment.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the accusations of the conscience against even the most private of sins, each human action carries with it potential reward or punishment. Living within the moral bounds established by God, especially as they are revealed in the Ten Commandments and further explicated in the rest of Scripture, results in certain physical benefits in this life. Living in disregard of the moral law results in penalties and hardships appropriate to the infraction (Gal 6:7-8). For example, refusal to work can result in poverty, and overindulgence can result in poor health. Some activities bring their own penalties. Christians should not conclude, however, that the presence of calamities in a person’s life must indicate a specific judgment of God against a particular sin. God can use calamities in the life of a Christian to guide him providentially to the goal of eternal life (1 Pt 4:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>On account of Adam’s sin, the creation was subject to a judgment of corruption (Gn 3:17). All of human life participates in a deterioration that is a manifestation of divine judgment against the sin that originated with Adam. God remains sovereign even over the universal corruption and is able to direct and control it for his ultimate purposes (Rom 8:20). Thus he can use calamities for the benefit of the Christian’s life (v 28), but he can also use them to manifest his anger on those who persist in deliberate sin and who reject his Son Jesus Christ as the Redeemer from sin. Pharaoh, who recognized Moses as God’s prophet and still rejected him and his message, is a prime example of a person who received God’s judgment (Ex 10:20). The Jews who saw the miracles of Jesus and rejected his claims to be the Messiah are also among those who received God’s judgment while living (Mt 12:22-32).<\/p>\n<p>Through wars and the creation and destruction of nations, God carries out judgment collectively against entire peoples. The OT records the rise and fall of nations and of kings. The refusal to acknowledge and worship the true God and to follow his laws eventually and most certainly results in national extinction. The destruction of Nineveh and Israel in the OT and Jerusalem in the NT are clear examples of God’s judgment against entire peoples who reject his message of salvation. Public disregard of the moral law must result in national disintegration, which is then frequently compounded by invasion by a foreign nation. The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was the direct result of immoral license (Jude 1:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LastJudgment\">Last Judgment<\/p>\n<p>Judgment in its final and ultimate sense is best understood as the appearance of Jesus Christ on the last day. At that time believers will inherit eternal life and unbelievers will be damned. The Christian does not fear this moment, because he has already been acquitted in Christ Jesus. The unbeliever rightfully fears death. The cause of horrible and unchangeable judgment is the persistent rejection of God’s offer of salvation. This is the sin against the Holy Spirit (Mt 12:32). Those who fall under its condemnation are those who have heard God’s special message to them and are convinced of its truth but who nevertheless persist in rejecting this salvation. As the unbeliever has rejected God in this life, so God rejects him in his death forever.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to this individual judgment, all nations will appear before Jesus (Mt 25:31-32). The fate of all those who appear before the Judge has already been sealed. The Scriptures teach that there is a judgment on that last day that will be made on the basis of works (vv 31-46). This should not be seen as a denial and contradiction of the principle that one is saved by faith alone. People enter into a saving relationship with Jesus Christ through faith alone, without works. Faith is known only to God and of itself is not visible to others. The evidence for the presence of faith is works.<\/p>\n<p>God’s judgments upon people in this life can be of benefit because through these judgments he is calling them to repentance. The judgment of the last day will be final; no one will be permitted to repent or change his or her mind about God. On that day all will recognize the truthfulness of God’s claims in Christ Jesus, but only those who have believed in him and carried out his will in their lives will receive the invitation to enter eternal life (v 34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PracticalImplications\">Practical Implications<\/p>\n<p>Christians live a positive and confident life knowing that Jesus has taken the divine judgment for them and thus they are free from any further divine retribution. At the same time they are aware of God’s judgment against all sins, including those of Christians, and that apart from Christ they would suffer the worst possible divine punishment. They see the evil and calamities of this life as God’s continued displeasure with sin. When they come, Christians use them as opportunities for searching their own souls and for repentance. Though they are not aware of the exact date of the last day, they prepare themselves each day for the final judgment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The concept of judgment covers the entire history of the human race—from the fall to the last day. God, as a just God who sees a decisive difference between good and evil, has no choice but to carry out judgment upon all people in their daily lives and especially at life’s conclusion. God in his grace has sent his Son to suffer the judgment we deserved, and in his mercy delays the final Day of Judgment so that we can come to repentance by faith in Jesus Christ (2 Pt 3:9). The great concepts of creation, justice, law, salvation, and atonement reach their climax in the divine judgment of the last day.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hell; Judgment Seat; Justification, Justified; Last Judgment; Second Coming of Christ; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDGMENT<\/h3>\n<p>Concept in Scripture closely related to the concept of God’s justice. In all his relationships God acts justly and morally. Human beings, created by God, have a moral dimension, so that they may positively respond to God’s righteous demands in their lives. Divine judgment, involving God’s approval or disapproval upon each human act, is a natural consequence of the Creator-creature relationship. Thus judgment, simply defined, is the divine response to human activity. God the Creator must also be God the Judge. Since God is just, he responds with either punishment or reward to what each person does. A human’s moral accountability to God (a quality not shared by the rest of creation) is an essential ingredient of being created in God’s image. Creation in the divine image means that God and man can communicate with each other in such a way that all people are able to understand God’s moral requirements and willingly respond to them. Among the various positive commands given to people in his original creation—including marriage, the subduing of the earth, and enjoyment of the Garden of Eden—was the negative command prohibiting the eating of the fruit from one tree. Defiance of this prohibition carried the threat of death as punishment (Gn 2:16-17). Genesis 3 contains the account of God’s first judgment, the one against Adam. He was punished by death since he had not lived within the moral regulations set by God (3:17-19). In a purely technical sense, judgment includes God’s approval upon acts that please him; more frequently, judgment is understood negatively in the sense that God punishes those who violate his commands. Since the fall, all human activity stands under God’s negative judgment (Rom 2:12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudgmentinThisLife\">Judgment in This Life<\/p>\n<p>The Christian idea of the atonement, that Christ died for sin in the place of man, depends on the premise that God holds humans accountable for their sins. But God sent his Son to deal with this problem. The Son willingly placed himself under God’s judgment, and in people’s place he received the divine punishment (Gal 3:13). Christ’s death for sin may therefore be considered the extreme manifestation of divine judgment. God as judge visits upon the soul of Christ in his crucifixion the total divine judgment against sin.<\/p>\n<p>Through faith, brought about by the Holy Spirit and fed by the Word, a believer becomes one with Christ and thus escapes divine judgment and is rescued from punishment (Rom 3:22). Those who, by faith, share in the benefits of Christ’s death stand before the divine Judge and receive a verdict of “not guilty,” and instead of punishment and divine retribution, receive a sentence of eternal life. Jesus says of those who believe in him that they have already passed through judgment, have escaped death, and are already sharing in eternal life (Jn 5:24).<\/p>\n<p>Though sins have been atoned for by Christ, each person—believer and unbeliever alike—still suffers certain consequences of his or her sins here in this life. For every human action there is a divine reaction (Rom 2:6). Paul speaks about the conscience, which carries out a series of judgments even upon the actions of those who do not know the true God (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>Governments are also manifestations of divine judgment upon man’s public performances with respect to the law. Civil justice, though often corrupted, is a means through which God carries out temporal judgment upon any infringement of the law in this life (Rom 13:1-2). Public crimes against society are not the only sins subject to divine judgment.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the accusations of the conscience against even the most private of sins, each human action carries with it potential reward or punishment. Living within the moral bounds established by God, especially as they are revealed in the Ten Commandments and further explicated in the rest of Scripture, results in certain physical benefits in this life. Living in disregard of the moral law results in penalties and hardships appropriate to the infraction (Gal 6:7-8). For example, refusal to work can result in poverty, and overindulgence can result in poor health. Some activities bring their own penalties. Christians should not conclude, however, that the presence of calamities in a person’s life must indicate a specific judgment of God against a particular sin. God can use calamities in the life of a Christian to guide him providentially to the goal of eternal life (1 Pt 4:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>On account of Adam’s sin, the creation was subject to a judgment of corruption (Gn 3:17). All of human life participates in a deterioration that is a manifestation of divine judgment against the sin that originated with Adam. God remains sovereign even over the universal corruption and is able to direct and control it for his ultimate purposes (Rom 8:20). Thus he can use calamities for the benefit of the Christian’s life (v 28), but he can also use them to manifest his anger on those who persist in deliberate sin and who reject his Son Jesus Christ as the Redeemer from sin. Pharaoh, who recognized Moses as God’s prophet and still rejected him and his message, is a prime example of a person who received God’s judgment (Ex 10:20). The Jews who saw the miracles of Jesus and rejected his claims to be the Messiah are also among those who received God’s judgment while living (Mt 12:22-32).<\/p>\n<p>Through wars and the creation and destruction of nations, God carries out judgment collectively against entire peoples. The OT records the rise and fall of nations and of kings. The refusal to acknowledge and worship the true God and to follow his laws eventually and most certainly results in national extinction. The destruction of Nineveh and Israel in the OT and Jerusalem in the NT are clear examples of God’s judgment against entire peoples who reject his message of salvation. Public disregard of the moral law must result in national disintegration, which is then frequently compounded by invasion by a foreign nation. The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was the direct result of immoral license (Jude 1:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LastJudgment\">Last Judgment<\/p>\n<p>Judgment in its final and ultimate sense is best understood as the appearance of Jesus Christ on the last day. At that time believers will inherit eternal life and unbelievers will be damned. The Christian does not fear this moment, because he has already been acquitted in Christ Jesus. The unbeliever rightfully fears death. The cause of horrible and unchangeable judgment is the persistent rejection of God’s offer of salvation. This is the sin against the Holy Spirit (Mt 12:32). Those who fall under its condemnation are those who have heard God’s special message to them and are convinced of its truth but who nevertheless persist in rejecting this salvation. As the unbeliever has rejected God in this life, so God rejects him in his death forever.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to this individual judgment, all nations will appear before Jesus (Mt 25:31-32). The fate of all those who appear before the Judge has already been sealed. The Scriptures teach that there is a judgment on that last day that will be made on the basis of works (vv 31-46). This should not be seen as a denial and contradiction of the principle that one is saved by faith alone. People enter into a saving relationship with Jesus Christ through faith alone, without works. Faith is known only to God and of itself is not visible to others. The evidence for the presence of faith is works.<\/p>\n<p>God’s judgments upon people in this life can be of benefit because through these judgments he is calling them to repentance. The judgment of the last day will be final; no one will be permitted to repent or change his or her mind about God. On that day all will recognize the truthfulness of God’s claims in Christ Jesus, but only those who have believed in him and carried out his will in their lives will receive the invitation to enter eternal life (v 34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PracticalImplications\">Practical Implications<\/p>\n<p>Christians live a positive and confident life knowing that Jesus has taken the divine judgment for them and thus they are free from any further divine retribution. At the same time they are aware of God’s judgment against all sins, including those of Christians, and that apart from Christ they would suffer the worst possible divine punishment. They see the evil and calamities of this life as God’s continued displeasure with sin. When they come, Christians use them as opportunities for searching their own souls and for repentance. Though they are not aware of the exact date of the last day, they prepare themselves each day for the final judgment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The concept of judgment covers the entire history of the human race—from the fall to the last day. God, as a just God who sees a decisive difference between good and evil, has no choice but to carry out judgment upon all people in their daily lives and especially at life’s conclusion. God in his grace has sent his Son to suffer the judgment we deserved, and in his mercy delays the final Day of Judgment so that we can come to repentance by faith in Jesus Christ (2 Pt 3:9). The great concepts of creation, justice, law, salvation, and atonement reach their climax in the divine judgment of the last day.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hell; Judgment Seat; Justification, Justified; Last Judgment; Second Coming of Christ; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDGMENT Concept in Scripture closely related to the concept of God’s justice. In all his relationships God acts justly and morally. Human beings, created by God, have a moral dimension, so that they may positively respond to God’s righteous demands in their lives. Divine judgment, involving God’s approval or disapproval upon each human act, is a natural consequence of the Creator-creature relationship. Thus judgment, simply defined, is the divine response to human activity. God the Creator m...","summary_en":"JUDGMENT Concept in Scripture closely related to the concept of God’s justice. In all his relationships God acts justly and morally. Human beings, created by God, have a moral dimension, so that they may positively respond to God’s righteous demands in their lives. Divine judgment, involving God’s approval or disapproval upon each human act, is a natural consequence of the Creator-creature relationship. Thus judgment, simply defined, is the divine response to human activity. God the Creator m...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23227,"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":56415,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Jesus is the giver of <em>life<\/em> as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Jesus is the giver of <em>life<\/em> as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:24 Jesus is the giver of life as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.","summary_en":"5:24 Jesus is the giver of life as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84041,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Jesus is the giver of <em>life<\/em> as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Jesus is the giver of <em>life<\/em> as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:24 Jesus is the giver of life as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.","summary_en":"5:24 Jesus is the giver of life as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111667,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Jesus is the giver of <em>life<\/em> as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Jesus is the giver of <em>life<\/em> as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:24 Jesus is the giver of life as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.","summary_en":"5:24 Jesus is the giver of life as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139293,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Jesus is the giver of <em>life<\/em> as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Jesus is the giver of <em>life<\/em> as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:24 Jesus is the giver of life as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.","summary_en":"5:24 Jesus is the giver of life as well as the judge (see 5:21-22), but he never works independently of the Father.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62418,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Righteous Suffer","title_en":"The Righteous Suffer","content_ro":"<h3>The Righteous Suffer<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies.<\/p>\n<p>Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and consequence. Some today blindly follow Job’s friends in equating godliness with material blessing. But at its root, this perspective is flawed, as demonstrated by the many examples throughout history of righteous suffering—including, of course, Christ himself. As believers we are told that “we must also share [Christ’s] suffering” and “what we suffer now is nothing compared to the glory he will reveal to us later” (Rom 8:17-18). At the core of being a disciple of Christ is a willingness to follow him into suffering (see Luke 9:23-25; Phil 3:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Even in his complaints, Job acknowledged that only God could provide the answers he needed. When Job wished for death, it was to gain relief until God could deal with him under more favorable conditions (14:13). When Job desired a mediator (9:33-35), it was to facilitate finding favor with God. When Job complained that God didn’t listen, it was because he knew that his answers had to come from God (see 19:25-27). That is the very essence of faith.<\/p>\n<p>We are not meant to know or understand everything (see Gen 2:16-17; Deut 29:29; Acts 1:7; 1 Thes 5:1-2). Some things are for God alone to comprehend and direct according to his sovereign will. Our response is to live by faith. Even when we suffer, we can trust God (see Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:4-8; 26:17-33; 31:38-42; 37:2-36; 39:1-20; Exod 1:8-11; 1 Sam 18:10-11, 28-29; 19:10; 22:1-19; 1 Kgs 21:1-15; 2 Chr 24:20-22; Job 9:33-35; 14:13; 19:25-27; Isa 54:17; Jer 11:18-21; 26:1-23; 38:1-13; Matt 23:29-37; John 5:24; 15:20; Acts 6:8–7:60; Rom 8:17-18, 26-39; Heb 12:1-13; 1 Pet 4:12-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Righteous Suffer<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies.<\/p>\n<p>Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and consequence. Some today blindly follow Job’s friends in equating godliness with material blessing. But at its root, this perspective is flawed, as demonstrated by the many examples throughout history of righteous suffering—including, of course, Christ himself. As believers we are told that “we must also share [Christ’s] suffering” and “what we suffer now is nothing compared to the glory he will reveal to us later” (Rom 8:17-18). At the core of being a disciple of Christ is a willingness to follow him into suffering (see Luke 9:23-25; Phil 3:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Even in his complaints, Job acknowledged that only God could provide the answers he needed. When Job wished for death, it was to gain relief until God could deal with him under more favorable conditions (14:13). When Job desired a mediator (9:33-35), it was to facilitate finding favor with God. When Job complained that God didn’t listen, it was because he knew that his answers had to come from God (see 19:25-27). That is the very essence of faith.<\/p>\n<p>We are not meant to know or understand everything (see Gen 2:16-17; Deut 29:29; Acts 1:7; 1 Thes 5:1-2). Some things are for God alone to comprehend and direct according to his sovereign will. Our response is to live by faith. Even when we suffer, we can trust God (see Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:4-8; 26:17-33; 31:38-42; 37:2-36; 39:1-20; Exod 1:8-11; 1 Sam 18:10-11, 28-29; 19:10; 22:1-19; 1 Kgs 21:1-15; 2 Chr 24:20-22; Job 9:33-35; 14:13; 19:25-27; Isa 54:17; Jer 11:18-21; 26:1-23; 38:1-13; Matt 23:29-37; John 5:24; 15:20; Acts 6:8–7:60; Rom 8:17-18, 26-39; Heb 12:1-13; 1 Pet 4:12-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Righteous Suffer The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies. Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and...","summary_en":"The Righteous Suffer The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies. Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65880,"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":67685,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67733,"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":90044,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Righteous Suffer","title_en":"The Righteous Suffer","content_ro":"<h3>The Righteous Suffer<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies.<\/p>\n<p>Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and consequence. Some today blindly follow Job’s friends in equating godliness with material blessing. But at its root, this perspective is flawed, as demonstrated by the many examples throughout history of righteous suffering—including, of course, Christ himself. As believers we are told that “we must also share [Christ’s] suffering” and “what we suffer now is nothing compared to the glory he will reveal to us later” (Rom 8:17-18). At the core of being a disciple of Christ is a willingness to follow him into suffering (see Luke 9:23-25; Phil 3:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Even in his complaints, Job acknowledged that only God could provide the answers he needed. When Job wished for death, it was to gain relief until God could deal with him under more favorable conditions (14:13). When Job desired a mediator (9:33-35), it was to facilitate finding favor with God. When Job complained that God didn’t listen, it was because he knew that his answers had to come from God (see 19:25-27). That is the very essence of faith.<\/p>\n<p>We are not meant to know or understand everything (see Gen 2:16-17; Deut 29:29; Acts 1:7; 1 Thes 5:1-2). Some things are for God alone to comprehend and direct according to his sovereign will. Our response is to live by faith. Even when we suffer, we can trust God (see Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:4-8; 26:17-33; 31:38-42; 37:2-36; 39:1-20; Exod 1:8-11; 1 Sam 18:10-11, 28-29; 19:10; 22:1-19; 1 Kgs 21:1-15; 2 Chr 24:20-22; Job 9:33-35; 14:13; 19:25-27; Isa 54:17; Jer 11:18-21; 26:1-23; 38:1-13; Matt 23:29-37; John 5:24; 15:20; Acts 6:8–7:60; Rom 8:17-18, 26-39; Heb 12:1-13; 1 Pet 4:12-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Righteous Suffer<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies.<\/p>\n<p>Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and consequence. Some today blindly follow Job’s friends in equating godliness with material blessing. But at its root, this perspective is flawed, as demonstrated by the many examples throughout history of righteous suffering—including, of course, Christ himself. As believers we are told that “we must also share [Christ’s] suffering” and “what we suffer now is nothing compared to the glory he will reveal to us later” (Rom 8:17-18). At the core of being a disciple of Christ is a willingness to follow him into suffering (see Luke 9:23-25; Phil 3:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Even in his complaints, Job acknowledged that only God could provide the answers he needed. When Job wished for death, it was to gain relief until God could deal with him under more favorable conditions (14:13). When Job desired a mediator (9:33-35), it was to facilitate finding favor with God. When Job complained that God didn’t listen, it was because he knew that his answers had to come from God (see 19:25-27). That is the very essence of faith.<\/p>\n<p>We are not meant to know or understand everything (see Gen 2:16-17; Deut 29:29; Acts 1:7; 1 Thes 5:1-2). Some things are for God alone to comprehend and direct according to his sovereign will. Our response is to live by faith. Even when we suffer, we can trust God (see Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:4-8; 26:17-33; 31:38-42; 37:2-36; 39:1-20; Exod 1:8-11; 1 Sam 18:10-11, 28-29; 19:10; 22:1-19; 1 Kgs 21:1-15; 2 Chr 24:20-22; Job 9:33-35; 14:13; 19:25-27; Isa 54:17; Jer 11:18-21; 26:1-23; 38:1-13; Matt 23:29-37; John 5:24; 15:20; Acts 6:8–7:60; Rom 8:17-18, 26-39; Heb 12:1-13; 1 Pet 4:12-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Righteous Suffer The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies. Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and...","summary_en":"The Righteous Suffer The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies. Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93506,"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":95311,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95359,"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":117670,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Righteous Suffer","title_en":"The Righteous Suffer","content_ro":"<h3>The Righteous Suffer<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies.<\/p>\n<p>Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and consequence. Some today blindly follow Job’s friends in equating godliness with material blessing. But at its root, this perspective is flawed, as demonstrated by the many examples throughout history of righteous suffering—including, of course, Christ himself. As believers we are told that “we must also share [Christ’s] suffering” and “what we suffer now is nothing compared to the glory he will reveal to us later” (Rom 8:17-18). At the core of being a disciple of Christ is a willingness to follow him into suffering (see Luke 9:23-25; Phil 3:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Even in his complaints, Job acknowledged that only God could provide the answers he needed. When Job wished for death, it was to gain relief until God could deal with him under more favorable conditions (14:13). When Job desired a mediator (9:33-35), it was to facilitate finding favor with God. When Job complained that God didn’t listen, it was because he knew that his answers had to come from God (see 19:25-27). That is the very essence of faith.<\/p>\n<p>We are not meant to know or understand everything (see Gen 2:16-17; Deut 29:29; Acts 1:7; 1 Thes 5:1-2). Some things are for God alone to comprehend and direct according to his sovereign will. Our response is to live by faith. Even when we suffer, we can trust God (see Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:4-8; 26:17-33; 31:38-42; 37:2-36; 39:1-20; Exod 1:8-11; 1 Sam 18:10-11, 28-29; 19:10; 22:1-19; 1 Kgs 21:1-15; 2 Chr 24:20-22; Job 9:33-35; 14:13; 19:25-27; Isa 54:17; Jer 11:18-21; 26:1-23; 38:1-13; Matt 23:29-37; John 5:24; 15:20; Acts 6:8–7:60; Rom 8:17-18, 26-39; Heb 12:1-13; 1 Pet 4:12-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Righteous Suffer<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies.<\/p>\n<p>Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and consequence. Some today blindly follow Job’s friends in equating godliness with material blessing. But at its root, this perspective is flawed, as demonstrated by the many examples throughout history of righteous suffering—including, of course, Christ himself. As believers we are told that “we must also share [Christ’s] suffering” and “what we suffer now is nothing compared to the glory he will reveal to us later” (Rom 8:17-18). At the core of being a disciple of Christ is a willingness to follow him into suffering (see Luke 9:23-25; Phil 3:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Even in his complaints, Job acknowledged that only God could provide the answers he needed. When Job wished for death, it was to gain relief until God could deal with him under more favorable conditions (14:13). When Job desired a mediator (9:33-35), it was to facilitate finding favor with God. When Job complained that God didn’t listen, it was because he knew that his answers had to come from God (see 19:25-27). That is the very essence of faith.<\/p>\n<p>We are not meant to know or understand everything (see Gen 2:16-17; Deut 29:29; Acts 1:7; 1 Thes 5:1-2). Some things are for God alone to comprehend and direct according to his sovereign will. Our response is to live by faith. Even when we suffer, we can trust God (see Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:4-8; 26:17-33; 31:38-42; 37:2-36; 39:1-20; Exod 1:8-11; 1 Sam 18:10-11, 28-29; 19:10; 22:1-19; 1 Kgs 21:1-15; 2 Chr 24:20-22; Job 9:33-35; 14:13; 19:25-27; Isa 54:17; Jer 11:18-21; 26:1-23; 38:1-13; Matt 23:29-37; John 5:24; 15:20; Acts 6:8–7:60; Rom 8:17-18, 26-39; Heb 12:1-13; 1 Pet 4:12-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Righteous Suffer The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies. Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and...","summary_en":"The Righteous Suffer The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies. Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121132,"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":122937,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122985,"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":145296,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Righteous Suffer","title_en":"The Righteous Suffer","content_ro":"<h3>The Righteous Suffer<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies.<\/p>\n<p>Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and consequence. Some today blindly follow Job’s friends in equating godliness with material blessing. But at its root, this perspective is flawed, as demonstrated by the many examples throughout history of righteous suffering—including, of course, Christ himself. As believers we are told that “we must also share [Christ’s] suffering” and “what we suffer now is nothing compared to the glory he will reveal to us later” (Rom 8:17-18). At the core of being a disciple of Christ is a willingness to follow him into suffering (see Luke 9:23-25; Phil 3:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Even in his complaints, Job acknowledged that only God could provide the answers he needed. When Job wished for death, it was to gain relief until God could deal with him under more favorable conditions (14:13). When Job desired a mediator (9:33-35), it was to facilitate finding favor with God. When Job complained that God didn’t listen, it was because he knew that his answers had to come from God (see 19:25-27). That is the very essence of faith.<\/p>\n<p>We are not meant to know or understand everything (see Gen 2:16-17; Deut 29:29; Acts 1:7; 1 Thes 5:1-2). Some things are for God alone to comprehend and direct according to his sovereign will. Our response is to live by faith. Even when we suffer, we can trust God (see Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:4-8; 26:17-33; 31:38-42; 37:2-36; 39:1-20; Exod 1:8-11; 1 Sam 18:10-11, 28-29; 19:10; 22:1-19; 1 Kgs 21:1-15; 2 Chr 24:20-22; Job 9:33-35; 14:13; 19:25-27; Isa 54:17; Jer 11:18-21; 26:1-23; 38:1-13; Matt 23:29-37; John 5:24; 15:20; Acts 6:8–7:60; Rom 8:17-18, 26-39; Heb 12:1-13; 1 Pet 4:12-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Righteous Suffer<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies.<\/p>\n<p>Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and consequence. Some today blindly follow Job’s friends in equating godliness with material blessing. But at its root, this perspective is flawed, as demonstrated by the many examples throughout history of righteous suffering—including, of course, Christ himself. As believers we are told that “we must also share [Christ’s] suffering” and “what we suffer now is nothing compared to the glory he will reveal to us later” (Rom 8:17-18). At the core of being a disciple of Christ is a willingness to follow him into suffering (see Luke 9:23-25; Phil 3:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Even in his complaints, Job acknowledged that only God could provide the answers he needed. When Job wished for death, it was to gain relief until God could deal with him under more favorable conditions (14:13). When Job desired a mediator (9:33-35), it was to facilitate finding favor with God. When Job complained that God didn’t listen, it was because he knew that his answers had to come from God (see 19:25-27). That is the very essence of faith.<\/p>\n<p>We are not meant to know or understand everything (see Gen 2:16-17; Deut 29:29; Acts 1:7; 1 Thes 5:1-2). Some things are for God alone to comprehend and direct according to his sovereign will. Our response is to live by faith. Even when we suffer, we can trust God (see Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:4-8; 26:17-33; 31:38-42; 37:2-36; 39:1-20; Exod 1:8-11; 1 Sam 18:10-11, 28-29; 19:10; 22:1-19; 1 Kgs 21:1-15; 2 Chr 24:20-22; Job 9:33-35; 14:13; 19:25-27; Isa 54:17; Jer 11:18-21; 26:1-23; 38:1-13; Matt 23:29-37; John 5:24; 15:20; Acts 6:8–7:60; Rom 8:17-18, 26-39; Heb 12:1-13; 1 Pet 4:12-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Righteous Suffer The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies. Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and...","summary_en":"The Righteous Suffer The book of Job invites us to examine the basis of our faith in God. Job’s loss of possessions and family members and the alienation of his friends shook his faith to its foundation. However, he maintained his trust in God, and he proved Satan’s accusations to be lies. Sin undoubtedly brings suffering, but as the book of Job demonstrates, suffering is not necessarily the result of one’s sin. Human suffering is more complex than a simple equation of individual behavior and...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148758,"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":150563,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150611,"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}],"25":[{"id":35894,"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":67124,"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":94750,"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":122376,"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":150002,"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}],"26":[{"id":11212,"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":14110,"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":23179,"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":37710,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Trinity*","title_en":"Trinity*","content_ro":"<h3>TRINITY*<\/h3>\n<p>Term designating the three members of the triune God: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The word “Trinity” does not appear in the Bible; it was created by scholars to describe the three members of the Godhead. Throughout the Bible, God is presented as being Father, Son, and Spirit—not three “gods” but three personas of the one and only God (see, e.g., Mt 28:19; 1 Cor 16:23-24; 2 Cor 13:13). The Scriptures present the Father as the source of creation, the giver of life, and God of all the universe (see Jn 5:26; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 3:14-15). The Son is depicted as the image of the invisible God, the exact representation of his being and nature, and the Messiah-Redeemer (see Phil 2:5-6; Col 1:14-16; Heb 1:1-3). The Spirit is God in action, God reaching people—influencing them, regenerating them, infilling them, and guiding them (see Jn 14:26; 15:26; Gal 4:6; Eph 2:18). All three are a tri-unity, inhabiting one another and working together to accomplish the divine design in the universe (see Jn 16:13-15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of (Father); Son of God; Spirit.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRINITY*<\/h3>\n<p>Term designating the three members of the triune God: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The word “Trinity” does not appear in the Bible; it was created by scholars to describe the three members of the Godhead. Throughout the Bible, God is presented as being Father, Son, and Spirit—not three “gods” but three personas of the one and only God (see, e.g., Mt 28:19; 1 Cor 16:23-24; 2 Cor 13:13). The Scriptures present the Father as the source of creation, the giver of life, and God of all the universe (see Jn 5:26; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 3:14-15). The Son is depicted as the image of the invisible God, the exact representation of his being and nature, and the Messiah-Redeemer (see Phil 2:5-6; Col 1:14-16; Heb 1:1-3). The Spirit is God in action, God reaching people—influencing them, regenerating them, infilling them, and guiding them (see Jn 14:26; 15:26; Gal 4:6; Eph 2:18). All three are a tri-unity, inhabiting one another and working together to accomplish the divine design in the universe (see Jn 16:13-15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of (Father); Son of God; Spirit.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRINITY* Term designating the three members of the triune God: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The word “Trinity” does not appear in the Bible; it was created by scholars to describe the three members of the Godhead. Throughout the Bible, God is presented as being Father, Son, and Spirit—not three “gods” but three personas of the one and only God (see, e.g., Mt 28:19; 1 Cor 16:23-24; 2 Cor 13:13). The Scriptures present the Father as the source of creation, the giver of life, and God of all...","summary_en":"TRINITY* Term designating the three members of the triune God: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The word “Trinity” does not appear in the Bible; it was created by scholars to describe the three members of the Godhead. Throughout the Bible, God is presented as being Father, Son, and Spirit—not three “gods” but three personas of the one and only God (see, e.g., Mt 28:19; 1 Cor 16:23-24; 2 Cor 13:13). The Scriptures present the Father as the source of creation, the giver of life, and God of all...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":64985,"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":66054,"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":92611,"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":93680,"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":120237,"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":121306,"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":147863,"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":148932,"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}],"28":[{"id":7264,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandment, the New","title_en":"Commandment, the New","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENT, The New<\/h3>\n<p>Christ’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, <span>nlt<\/span>). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:7, 11-12) but is not called “new” in those passages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LoveasaCommandment\">Love as a Commandment<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had already commanded his disciples to love their enemies (Mt 5:43-45) and to love their neighbors as themselves (Lk 10:25-37). The “new commandment” demanded that Christians love each other. In no sense did it overrule the other two love commands. Jesus’ command to love those within the church was intended to produce a compelling testimony to those outside the church. It would offer them demonstrable proof (1) that his followers were Christlike in their love toward one another; (2) that the basis for vital human community could be found “in Christ”; and (3) that, by extension, what Jesus said about himself and his work was really true (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus chose the word used to describe the OT law, giving similar authority to his new commandment. In fact, the law included commands to love (Lv 19:18, 34; Dt 10:19). The apostle Paul thought of love as the “law of Christ” (Gal 6:2), and James called the love command “the royal law” (Jas 2:8) and “the perfect law of liberty” (1:25; 2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The word “commandment” had another meaning as well. Many Jews in Jesus’ day wrongly supposed that the commandments were given in order that men, by obeying them, could show themselves worthy of God’s blessing (Rom 8:3; Gal 3:2). Jesus made it clear, however, that love was a natural result of God’s blessing, not a necessary condition for it. For Jesus, the commandment expressed how one who is already living in the joy of God’s blessing should act. Disciples were commanded to love in the same sense that branches were “commanded” to bear fruit: the branch by abiding in the vine, the Christian by abiding in Christ (Jn 15:4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatMadeItNew\">What Made It New?<\/p>\n<p>The character of the new commandment comes from the “new covenant” (Jer 31:31-34; Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25), which Jesus inaugurated at the Last Supper. Under the new covenant, God “writes” his law on the hearts of believers (Heb 10:16). That is, he actively works in them in the person of the Holy Spirit (Ez 36:27; 2 Cor 3:3), and gives them a new willingness to obey him (Rom 8:4; Gal 5:16). The new commandment of love is the all-embracing, single requirement of the new covenant (Rom 13:8, 10; Gal 5:14). Obedience, therefore, is a gift, because “love is from God; and every one who loves is born of God” (1 Jn 4:7, <span>nasb<\/span>). It is the fruit of faith (3:23) and part of the gospel itself (v 11).<\/p>\n<p>The close relationship between the new covenant and the new commandment may explain partly why the command to love was called “new.” Christ’s incarnation inaugurated a new age. “The darkness is disappearing,” John wrote, “and the true light is already shining” (1 Jn 2:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Anticipating his ascension into heaven (Jn 13:33-35), Jesus left one inclusive commandment to preserve his disciples in the new age until its consummation at the Judgment Day (Jn 5:28-29; 1 Jn 4:17). Obedience to the new commandment was supposed to identify them as Jesus’ disciples during his absence (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23). The love command was thus new in the sense that it had a special function in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>What made the age new was that Jesus Christ’s coming had revealed God the Father with an unprecedented and incomparable clarity (Jn 1:18; 10:30; 17:6-8). No prophet had ever been able to say, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (14:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Therefore Jesus’ demand that the disciples love each other “as I have loved you” (13:34) was, by every human standard, new and astonishing. No human had ever loved perfectly like Jesus (v 1). To follow his example of love, then, was a new commandment. The greatness of Jesus’ love moved him to “lay down his life for his friends” (15:13, <span>niv<\/span>). Accordingly, John drew the conclusion that “we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers” (1 Jn 3:16, <span>niv<\/span>). It follows that love means never shutting one’s heart against another Christian in need (v 17), but rather rejoicing to sacrifice one’s temporal good for another’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENT, The New<\/h3>\n<p>Christ’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, <span>nlt<\/span>). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:7, 11-12) but is not called “new” in those passages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LoveasaCommandment\">Love as a Commandment<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had already commanded his disciples to love their enemies (Mt 5:43-45) and to love their neighbors as themselves (Lk 10:25-37). The “new commandment” demanded that Christians love each other. In no sense did it overrule the other two love commands. Jesus’ command to love those within the church was intended to produce a compelling testimony to those outside the church. It would offer them demonstrable proof (1) that his followers were Christlike in their love toward one another; (2) that the basis for vital human community could be found “in Christ”; and (3) that, by extension, what Jesus said about himself and his work was really true (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus chose the word used to describe the OT law, giving similar authority to his new commandment. In fact, the law included commands to love (Lv 19:18, 34; Dt 10:19). The apostle Paul thought of love as the “law of Christ” (Gal 6:2), and James called the love command “the royal law” (Jas 2:8) and “the perfect law of liberty” (1:25; 2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The word “commandment” had another meaning as well. Many Jews in Jesus’ day wrongly supposed that the commandments were given in order that men, by obeying them, could show themselves worthy of God’s blessing (Rom 8:3; Gal 3:2). Jesus made it clear, however, that love was a natural result of God’s blessing, not a necessary condition for it. For Jesus, the commandment expressed how one who is already living in the joy of God’s blessing should act. Disciples were commanded to love in the same sense that branches were “commanded” to bear fruit: the branch by abiding in the vine, the Christian by abiding in Christ (Jn 15:4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatMadeItNew\">What Made It New?<\/p>\n<p>The character of the new commandment comes from the “new covenant” (Jer 31:31-34; Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25), which Jesus inaugurated at the Last Supper. Under the new covenant, God “writes” his law on the hearts of believers (Heb 10:16). That is, he actively works in them in the person of the Holy Spirit (Ez 36:27; 2 Cor 3:3), and gives them a new willingness to obey him (Rom 8:4; Gal 5:16). The new commandment of love is the all-embracing, single requirement of the new covenant (Rom 13:8, 10; Gal 5:14). Obedience, therefore, is a gift, because “love is from God; and every one who loves is born of God” (1 Jn 4:7, <span>nasb<\/span>). It is the fruit of faith (3:23) and part of the gospel itself (v 11).<\/p>\n<p>The close relationship between the new covenant and the new commandment may explain partly why the command to love was called “new.” Christ’s incarnation inaugurated a new age. “The darkness is disappearing,” John wrote, “and the true light is already shining” (1 Jn 2:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Anticipating his ascension into heaven (Jn 13:33-35), Jesus left one inclusive commandment to preserve his disciples in the new age until its consummation at the Judgment Day (Jn 5:28-29; 1 Jn 4:17). Obedience to the new commandment was supposed to identify them as Jesus’ disciples during his absence (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23). The love command was thus new in the sense that it had a special function in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>What made the age new was that Jesus Christ’s coming had revealed God the Father with an unprecedented and incomparable clarity (Jn 1:18; 10:30; 17:6-8). No prophet had ever been able to say, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (14:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Therefore Jesus’ demand that the disciples love each other “as I have loved you” (13:34) was, by every human standard, new and astonishing. No human had ever loved perfectly like Jesus (v 1). To follow his example of love, then, was a new commandment. The greatness of Jesus’ love moved him to “lay down his life for his friends” (15:13, <span>niv<\/span>). Accordingly, John drew the conclusion that “we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers” (1 Jn 3:16, <span>niv<\/span>). It follows that love means never shutting one’s heart against another Christian in need (v 17), but rather rejoicing to sacrifice one’s temporal good for another’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENT, The New Christ’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, nlt). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENT, The New Christ’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, nlt). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11063,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Eschatology*","title_en":"Eschatology*","content_ro":"<h3>ESCHATOLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of theology concerned with the study of the last things, or end times, whether in relation to the individual or the world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TopicsofEschatology\">Topics of Eschatology<\/p>\n<h5>Death<\/h5>\n<p>The Bible teaches that all humans will die (Heb 9:27). The only exceptions will be those who are still alive when Christ returns (1 Thes 4:17). Physical death, or the “first death,” is the separation of the soul from the body. Because of the presence of sin in the world, everyone must die (Rom 5:12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Intermediate State<\/h5>\n<p>This refers to the condition of the person between the time of death and the resurrection. The traditional orthodox view is that believers experience a state of conscious bliss in the presence of the Lord, while unbelievers are tormented by separation from the presence of God. This, however, is a relatively incomplete state when compared with the final destiny of each. Some groups, such as Seventh-Day Adventists, have held a belief in a type of “soul sleep,” or unconsciousness, between death and resurrection. Still others, notably Roman Catholics, believe in a place of purging in preparation for the future life.<\/p>\n<h5>The Second Coming<\/h5>\n<p>Scripture teaches that at the end of time Christ will return in a personal, bodily form (Acts 1:11). No one knows exactly when this will occur, and it will consequently catch some by surprise, coming as a thief in the night (Lk 12:39-40). Although the time is not known, the fact that it will occur is very definite. Many of Jesus’ parables (especially in Mt 24–25) refer to this fact and to the appropriateness of alert, faithful, and intensive activity.<\/p>\n<h5>The Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>All who have died will come to life. This will be a bodily resurrection, a resumption of the bodily existence of each person. For believers, this will take place in connection with the second coming of Christ and will involve the transformation of the body of this present flesh into a new, perfected body (1 Cor 15:35-56). The Bible also indicates a resurrection of unbelievers, unto eternal death (Jn 5:28-29).<\/p>\n<h5>The Judgment<\/h5>\n<p>There will be a time of judgment in which the Lord will determine the spiritual condition of all who have lived, based on their relationship to him. On these grounds some will be sent off to everlasting reward and others to eternal punishment. Some theologians distinguish between the times when believers and unbelievers will be judged. Some see as many as seven different judgments occurring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Final States<\/h5>\n<p>The Bible teaches the existence of heaven, a place of eternal joy, where Christians are in the presence of God. The Bible also speaks of hell (specifically Gehenna, or the lake of fire), a state of anguished separation of unbelievers from the presence of God. These are fixed states, determined by decisions made within this life.<\/p>\n<h5>The Millennium<\/h5>\n<p>Many Christians believe there will be an earthly reign of Jesus Christ, called the Millennium, immediately preceding the final judgment. This belief is based on Revelation 20:4-7. Those who hold that Christ will return personally to inaugurate this period are called premillennialists. Others, who teach that the kingdom will be established through the progressive successful preaching of the gospel, are termed postmillennialists. Still others, called amillennialists, do not believe that there will be any earthly reign of Christ at all, interpreting the 1,000 years of Revelation 20 symbolically.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Great Tribulation<\/h5>\n<p>The Bible speaks of a time of great anguish or tribulation, which will come upon the earth, exceeding anything that has ever occurred before. Some, identifying this with the 70th week of Daniel 9:24-27, believe it will be of seven years duration. Some believe the church will be present to experience this because the Lord will not return until the end of the period. These are termed posttribulationists. Others, known as pretribulationists, believe that the Lord’s second coming will be in two stages, or phases: (1) Christ will come for his church to take the believers away before the great Tribulation; (2) Christ will then make an open display of his glory before the whole world. Still others, known as midtribulationists, believe that the church will be present for the first half of the seven years but will be removed before the severe part of the Tribulation begins.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apocalyptic; Day of the Lord; Death; Eternal Life; Heaven; Hell; Intermediate State; Judgment; Last Days; Last Judgment; Millennium; Resurrection; Second Coming of Christ; Daniel, Book of; Tribulation; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ESCHATOLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of theology concerned with the study of the last things, or end times, whether in relation to the individual or the world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TopicsofEschatology\">Topics of Eschatology<\/p>\n<h5>Death<\/h5>\n<p>The Bible teaches that all humans will die (Heb 9:27). The only exceptions will be those who are still alive when Christ returns (1 Thes 4:17). Physical death, or the “first death,” is the separation of the soul from the body. Because of the presence of sin in the world, everyone must die (Rom 5:12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Intermediate State<\/h5>\n<p>This refers to the condition of the person between the time of death and the resurrection. The traditional orthodox view is that believers experience a state of conscious bliss in the presence of the Lord, while unbelievers are tormented by separation from the presence of God. This, however, is a relatively incomplete state when compared with the final destiny of each. Some groups, such as Seventh-Day Adventists, have held a belief in a type of “soul sleep,” or unconsciousness, between death and resurrection. Still others, notably Roman Catholics, believe in a place of purging in preparation for the future life.<\/p>\n<h5>The Second Coming<\/h5>\n<p>Scripture teaches that at the end of time Christ will return in a personal, bodily form (Acts 1:11). No one knows exactly when this will occur, and it will consequently catch some by surprise, coming as a thief in the night (Lk 12:39-40). Although the time is not known, the fact that it will occur is very definite. Many of Jesus’ parables (especially in Mt 24–25) refer to this fact and to the appropriateness of alert, faithful, and intensive activity.<\/p>\n<h5>The Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>All who have died will come to life. This will be a bodily resurrection, a resumption of the bodily existence of each person. For believers, this will take place in connection with the second coming of Christ and will involve the transformation of the body of this present flesh into a new, perfected body (1 Cor 15:35-56). The Bible also indicates a resurrection of unbelievers, unto eternal death (Jn 5:28-29).<\/p>\n<h5>The Judgment<\/h5>\n<p>There will be a time of judgment in which the Lord will determine the spiritual condition of all who have lived, based on their relationship to him. On these grounds some will be sent off to everlasting reward and others to eternal punishment. Some theologians distinguish between the times when believers and unbelievers will be judged. Some see as many as seven different judgments occurring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Final States<\/h5>\n<p>The Bible teaches the existence of heaven, a place of eternal joy, where Christians are in the presence of God. The Bible also speaks of hell (specifically Gehenna, or the lake of fire), a state of anguished separation of unbelievers from the presence of God. These are fixed states, determined by decisions made within this life.<\/p>\n<h5>The Millennium<\/h5>\n<p>Many Christians believe there will be an earthly reign of Jesus Christ, called the Millennium, immediately preceding the final judgment. This belief is based on Revelation 20:4-7. Those who hold that Christ will return personally to inaugurate this period are called premillennialists. Others, who teach that the kingdom will be established through the progressive successful preaching of the gospel, are termed postmillennialists. Still others, called amillennialists, do not believe that there will be any earthly reign of Christ at all, interpreting the 1,000 years of Revelation 20 symbolically.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Great Tribulation<\/h5>\n<p>The Bible speaks of a time of great anguish or tribulation, which will come upon the earth, exceeding anything that has ever occurred before. Some, identifying this with the 70th week of Daniel 9:24-27, believe it will be of seven years duration. Some believe the church will be present to experience this because the Lord will not return until the end of the period. These are termed posttribulationists. Others, known as pretribulationists, believe that the Lord’s second coming will be in two stages, or phases: (1) Christ will come for his church to take the believers away before the great Tribulation; (2) Christ will then make an open display of his glory before the whole world. Still others, known as midtribulationists, believe that the church will be present for the first half of the seven years but will be removed before the severe part of the Tribulation begins.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apocalyptic; Day of the Lord; Death; Eternal Life; Heaven; Hell; Intermediate State; Judgment; Last Days; Last Judgment; Millennium; Resurrection; Second Coming of Christ; Daniel, Book of; Tribulation; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ESCHATOLOGY* Branch of theology concerned with the study of the last things, or end times, whether in relation to the individual or the world. Topics of Eschatology Death The Bible teaches that all humans will die (Heb 9:27). The only exceptions will be those who are still alive when Christ returns (1 Thes 4:17). Physical death, or the “first death,” is the separation of the soul from the body. Because of the presence of sin in the world, everyone must die (Rom 5:12). The Intermediate State T...","summary_en":"ESCHATOLOGY* Branch of theology concerned with the study of the last things, or end times, whether in relation to the individual or the world. Topics of Eschatology Death The Bible teaches that all humans will die (Heb 9:27). The only exceptions will be those who are still alive when Christ returns (1 Thes 4:17). Physical death, or the “first death,” is the separation of the soul from the body. Because of the presence of sin in the world, everyone must die (Rom 5:12). The Intermediate State T...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67094,"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":94720,"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":122346,"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":149972,"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}],"29":[{"id":11199,"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":17646,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"State*, Intermediate","title_en":"State*, Intermediate","content_ro":"<h3>INTERMEDIATE STATE*<\/h3>\n<p>State of the human person after death and before the final resurrection. Such teaching is more developed in the NT than in the OT, though it is a mistake to think that reference to it is totally absent in the OT (Jb 19:25). According to Christ, the intermediate state is deducible from such texts as Exodus 3:6 (Mt 22:32). Even in the NT, an account of the intermediate state is not given explicitly but may be inferred from teaching about the physical death and resurrection of all people, but especially of believers. This is taught by Christ himself (Mt 22:30-32) and by the apostles, particularly Paul (1 Cor 15). In addition, the biblical teaching that the human being is a unity of soul and body and not simply a soul that happens to be embodied (Gn 2:7) has implications for a person’s state after death. From such data two conclusions regarding the intermediate state may be drawn. The first is that physical death is not the total cessation of the life of the individual but that the person lives on, not merely in the memories of those who survive, but as a distinct personality, and in the case of believers with awareness of the loving presence of God (Phil 1:23). The second conclusion is that such an existence is not a fully human existence but is incomplete or anomalous, since being embodied is essential for an individual to be in God’s image. The individual, surviving death, awaits the resurrection of the body when, in the case of a Christian, he or she will experience complete redemption, a state of complete emancipation from sin in the presence of Christ (1 Cor 15:50-58). The biblical data regarding the character of the intermediate state of those who are outside Christ is less clear, including as it does the difficult reference to Christ’s preaching to the “imprisoned” spirits (1 Pt 3:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture is restrained in its portrayal of what life in the intermediate state is like. Paul says of himself that after his death he will be “with Christ, which is far better” (Phil 1:23) but he gives no details. Nor is it wise to look for such details in such biblical incidents as that of Saul and the medium at Endor (1 Sm 28:7), which is subject to a number of different interpretations. Even Christ’s parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), because of its obviously symbolic character and its avowed purpose of teaching about the importance of the present life for a person’s eternal destiny, must be treated with caution. Perhaps the most that can be said is that the dead in Christ are “immediately with God” and that they rest in his loving presence until the resurrection, while the unsaved are in a comfortless condition awaiting their resurrection to judgment (Jn 5:29).<\/p>\n<p>Discussion of the intermediate state in the history of Christian thought has focused upon three separate aspects that may help to clarify the biblical data further. First, under the influence of Greek philosophical ideas, there has been a recurring Platonic influence in Christian theology in which the Pauline contrast between the flesh and the spirit has been misinterpreted and the soul has been emphasized at the expense of the body, with the result that the prospective resurrection of the dead and its eschatological setting has either been played down or eliminated altogether because of its allegedly physical (and therefore unspiritual) aspect. The doctrine of the immortality of the disembodied soul is sometimes substituted for the idea of an intermediate state prior to resurrection, but without any warrant from Scripture. In modern theology a tendency to discount the historical has tended to displace the earlier discounting of the physical, but with much the same effect, at best a spiritualizing of postmortem existence, at worst a denial of any such existence. But it is clear from Scripture that the intermediate state is a state between two phases of embodiment, the present state of physical embodiment and that of “spiritual embodiment” (1 Cor 15:44), which is to occur at Christ’s second coming (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>Second, during the Reformation, a controversy arose between John Calvin and some of the Anabaptists over “soul sleep.” Calvin vehemently maintained that the intermediate state is one of conscious awareness of God’s presence—something his opponents denied. For Calvin such a denial was equivalent to holding that the soul is annihilated at death and to denying that Christ exercises rule over the dead before they are resurrected. Calvin’s view is supported by Paul’s affirmation that nothing separates the believer from the love of God—not even death (Rom 8:35-39). The biblical teaching that upon death the believer “sleeps” (1 Thes 4:14) is interpreted to mean that the dead no longer communicate with the living on earth and no longer engage in labor, but are in repose. To “fall asleep in Jesus” is thus to enjoy the presence of Jesus in a disembodied state, the nearest analogy of which in present experience may be found in dreaming when the awareness of the dreamer does not depend upon the functioning of any of the bodily senses.<\/p>\n<p>A third focus for Christian thought has been on whether or not a person’s eternal state is fixed at the time of death, or whether repentance and spiritual growth and purgation are possible or inevitable after death. It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that death is followed by purgatory for all who are imperfect. In purgatory the soul is freed from the remnants of sin, and the period of purgation may be lessened by the gifts, prayers, and masses of those who survive the deceased. Such a view is rejected by most Protestants as being inconsistent with the biblical teaching on the complete and finished work of Christ (Heb 9:28), on the impossibility of one human being meriting or otherwise gaining grace for another (Lk 17:10), and on the biblical teaching that the eternal state of the soul is determined by its condition at death (Heb 9:27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Hades; Heaven; Hell; Paradise; Sheol.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INTERMEDIATE STATE*<\/h3>\n<p>State of the human person after death and before the final resurrection. Such teaching is more developed in the NT than in the OT, though it is a mistake to think that reference to it is totally absent in the OT (Jb 19:25). According to Christ, the intermediate state is deducible from such texts as Exodus 3:6 (Mt 22:32). Even in the NT, an account of the intermediate state is not given explicitly but may be inferred from teaching about the physical death and resurrection of all people, but especially of believers. This is taught by Christ himself (Mt 22:30-32) and by the apostles, particularly Paul (1 Cor 15). In addition, the biblical teaching that the human being is a unity of soul and body and not simply a soul that happens to be embodied (Gn 2:7) has implications for a person’s state after death. From such data two conclusions regarding the intermediate state may be drawn. The first is that physical death is not the total cessation of the life of the individual but that the person lives on, not merely in the memories of those who survive, but as a distinct personality, and in the case of believers with awareness of the loving presence of God (Phil 1:23). The second conclusion is that such an existence is not a fully human existence but is incomplete or anomalous, since being embodied is essential for an individual to be in God’s image. The individual, surviving death, awaits the resurrection of the body when, in the case of a Christian, he or she will experience complete redemption, a state of complete emancipation from sin in the presence of Christ (1 Cor 15:50-58). The biblical data regarding the character of the intermediate state of those who are outside Christ is less clear, including as it does the difficult reference to Christ’s preaching to the “imprisoned” spirits (1 Pt 3:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture is restrained in its portrayal of what life in the intermediate state is like. Paul says of himself that after his death he will be “with Christ, which is far better” (Phil 1:23) but he gives no details. Nor is it wise to look for such details in such biblical incidents as that of Saul and the medium at Endor (1 Sm 28:7), which is subject to a number of different interpretations. Even Christ’s parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), because of its obviously symbolic character and its avowed purpose of teaching about the importance of the present life for a person’s eternal destiny, must be treated with caution. Perhaps the most that can be said is that the dead in Christ are “immediately with God” and that they rest in his loving presence until the resurrection, while the unsaved are in a comfortless condition awaiting their resurrection to judgment (Jn 5:29).<\/p>\n<p>Discussion of the intermediate state in the history of Christian thought has focused upon three separate aspects that may help to clarify the biblical data further. First, under the influence of Greek philosophical ideas, there has been a recurring Platonic influence in Christian theology in which the Pauline contrast between the flesh and the spirit has been misinterpreted and the soul has been emphasized at the expense of the body, with the result that the prospective resurrection of the dead and its eschatological setting has either been played down or eliminated altogether because of its allegedly physical (and therefore unspiritual) aspect. The doctrine of the immortality of the disembodied soul is sometimes substituted for the idea of an intermediate state prior to resurrection, but without any warrant from Scripture. In modern theology a tendency to discount the historical has tended to displace the earlier discounting of the physical, but with much the same effect, at best a spiritualizing of postmortem existence, at worst a denial of any such existence. But it is clear from Scripture that the intermediate state is a state between two phases of embodiment, the present state of physical embodiment and that of “spiritual embodiment” (1 Cor 15:44), which is to occur at Christ’s second coming (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>Second, during the Reformation, a controversy arose between John Calvin and some of the Anabaptists over “soul sleep.” Calvin vehemently maintained that the intermediate state is one of conscious awareness of God’s presence—something his opponents denied. For Calvin such a denial was equivalent to holding that the soul is annihilated at death and to denying that Christ exercises rule over the dead before they are resurrected. Calvin’s view is supported by Paul’s affirmation that nothing separates the believer from the love of God—not even death (Rom 8:35-39). The biblical teaching that upon death the believer “sleeps” (1 Thes 4:14) is interpreted to mean that the dead no longer communicate with the living on earth and no longer engage in labor, but are in repose. To “fall asleep in Jesus” is thus to enjoy the presence of Jesus in a disembodied state, the nearest analogy of which in present experience may be found in dreaming when the awareness of the dreamer does not depend upon the functioning of any of the bodily senses.<\/p>\n<p>A third focus for Christian thought has been on whether or not a person’s eternal state is fixed at the time of death, or whether repentance and spiritual growth and purgation are possible or inevitable after death. It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that death is followed by purgatory for all who are imperfect. In purgatory the soul is freed from the remnants of sin, and the period of purgation may be lessened by the gifts, prayers, and masses of those who survive the deceased. Such a view is rejected by most Protestants as being inconsistent with the biblical teaching on the complete and finished work of Christ (Heb 9:28), on the impossibility of one human being meriting or otherwise gaining grace for another (Lk 17:10), and on the biblical teaching that the eternal state of the soul is determined by its condition at death (Heb 9:27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Hades; Heaven; Hell; Paradise; Sheol.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INTERMEDIATE STATE* State of the human person after death and before the final resurrection. Such teaching is more developed in the NT than in the OT, though it is a mistake to think that reference to it is totally absent in the OT (Jb 19:25). According to Christ, the intermediate state is deducible from such texts as Exodus 3:6 (Mt 22:32). Even in the NT, an account of the intermediate state is not given explicitly but may be inferred from teaching about the physical death and resurrection o...","summary_en":"INTERMEDIATE STATE* State of the human person after death and before the final resurrection. Such teaching is more developed in the NT than in the OT, though it is a mistake to think that reference to it is totally absent in the OT (Jb 19:25). According to Christ, the intermediate state is deducible from such texts as Exodus 3:6 (Mt 22:32). Even in the NT, an account of the intermediate state is not given explicitly but may be inferred from teaching about the physical death and resurrection o...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32792,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Resurrection","title_en":"Resurrection","content_ro":"<h3>RESURRECTION<\/h3>\n<p>Act of being raised from the dead, used in the Bible in three different contexts: (1) It refers to miraculous raising of the dead back to earthly life, such as when Elijah raised a boy (1 Kgs 17:8-24), Elisha raised the Shunammite’s son (2 Kgs 4:18-37), Jesus raised both Jairus’s daughter (Mk 5:35-43) and Lazarus (Jn 11:17-44), Peter raised Dorcas (Acts 9:36-42), and Paul raised Eutychus (20:9-12). There is no hint that these resuscitations would prevent future death. (2) It refers most frequently to the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (3) It also refers to the eschatological resurrection of mankind at the end of time for punishment or reward (Jn 5:29; cf. Rv 20:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Resurrection in the Old Testament and Judaism<\/p>\n<p>• The Resurrection of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>• The Resurrection Accounts<\/p>\n<p>• The Significance of Christ’s Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>• Resurrection in General<\/p>\n<p>• Resurrection and Gnosticism<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ResurrectionintheOldTestamentandJudaism\">Resurrection in the Old Testament and Judaism<\/p>\n<p>The concept of resurrection to eternal life developed slowly in Israel. Life and death were limited to physical existence in this world. Death meant leaving this world and entering a shadowy existence known as Sheol, the place of the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">rephaim<\/span><em>,<\/em> or shades (Is 14:9), a place of hopelessness (2 Sm 12:23; Jb 7:9-10). The tragedy of Sheol was that a person was cut off from fellowship with God. At that stage of Israel’s thought, there seemed little hope for resurrection (Pss 6:4-5; 88:10-12).<\/p>\n<p>But in the midst of hopelessness concerning a personal future, Israel developed a sense of faithfulness to God. In spite of the fact that the future was not clear, Job cried helplessly, “If a man dies, will he live again?” (Jb 14:14). As Job sought for the seemingly impossible, the difficult passage in Job 19:25-26 suggests the reality of resurrection by a living redeemer (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>While some would argue that Hosea 6:1-3 suggests a resurrection, it is more likely that Israel considered it to be a promise of God’s continuing care, even when it experienced defeat at the hands of its enemies. Whether Paul saw in the third-day statement of Hosea a reference to Jesus is difficult to assess. This passage, along with texts like the dry bones of Ezekiel (ch 37), focus primarily on giving Israel hope in spite of defeat. But they may have become part of a developing sense in Israel that after death there should be something more.<\/p>\n<p>In Daniel 12:2, however, there is a sure reference to the resurrection of the dead. Indeed, the text announced a twofold resurrection of Jews: some to eternal life and some to eternal contempt. But there was no general resurrection of all people suggested by this text.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, views began to solidify. The theologically conservative Sadducees would have nothing to do with the new ideas of resurrection and the afterlife. They continued to argue that there was no mention of resurrection in the writings of Moses, that life pertained to this earthly realm, and that the future hope was experienced through one’s children (Ecclus 46:12). Sheol, the place of the dead, was devoid of relationship with God and was a place of hapless existence. The Sadducean opinion of the resurrection is generally well known to Christians because of the encounter between Jesus and the Sadducees when they sought to ensnare him concerning the wife of seven brothers. Jesus rejected their views of the resurrection, of God, and of the Scriptures (Mk 12:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees, along with the Essenes and those at Qumran, believed in resurrection. A twofold pattern of resurrection was suggested by the famous eschatological passages of 2 Esdras 7 and the Apocalypse of Baruch 50–51. Both texts may be as late as the first century <span>AD<\/span>. In the Similitudes of 1 Enoch, the righteous Jews could generally expect resurrection, but not the wicked (1 Enoch 1:46, 51, 62). But elsewhere in Enoch there is a hint that some wicked may be raised for judgment (vv 22, 67, 90). The resurrection of the righteous in these texts would generally be linked to a spiritual type of body, yet in 2 Maccabees 7:14ff., the view seems less developed and more physical. The ascetics at Qumran expected a resurrection in the great Day of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>While in Judaism there was a growing sense of an eschatological day of resurrection and reckoning, there was no hint anywhere of a resurrection of the Messiah. Such an idea had to await the historical reality of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheResurrectionofJesusChrist\">The Resurrection of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection of Christ is the central point of Christianity. So important was the resurrection for Paul that he hinged both preaching and faith upon its validity. He considered that a Christianity without the resurrection would be empty and meaningless (1 Cor 15:12-19). Indeed, the resurrection for him was the unveiling of God’s power in Jesus (Rom 1:4).<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection of Christ is the presupposition behind other texts of the NT as well. Rebirth to a living hope is based upon the resurrection (1 Pt 1:3). It is the foundation for witness and fellowship with God, because the living Lord has been seen and touched (1 Jn 1:1-4). It is the bedrock thesis for ministry and apostleship (Acts 1:21-25). The Gospels likewise would hardly have been good news if they did not conclude with Christ’s resurrection. Christ’s resurrection is the prototype for all the believers, who will experience resurrection when Christ returns.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheResurrectionAccounts\">The Resurrection Accounts<\/p>\n<p>While the resurrection of Jesus Christ is the very essence of Christianity, it has been the subject of considerable debate. Scholars have frequently noted the variations that are present in the accounts. How many and who were the women at the tomb? Was there one (Mt; Mk) or were there two (Lk; Jn) angels at the tomb? Did the women come to anoint the body (Mk; Lk) or to see the tomb (Mt)? Did the women say nothing to anyone because of fear (Mk), or did they report to the disciples (Mt)? What was the order of the appearances, and did they take place in Jerusalem (Lk; Jn 20) or in Galilee (Mt; Jn 21) or in both places? Can the appearances be harmonized? What kind of body did Jesus possess? These and many other questions have been the watershed for a great deal of contemporary scholarly debate.<\/p>\n<p>Many of these questions were not first discovered by recent scholars. Tatian in the second century sought to remove the questions by composing his <em>Diatessaron<\/em> (harmony) in hopes that Christians would accept his work as a variant-free substitute for the Gospels. Although Christians liked the harmony, they continued to faithfully transmit the Gospels, because they believed that in them, by divine inspiration, God had provided a powerful witness concerning his Son. Many today still try the way of harmonization in an effort to deal with the minutia of historical questions, but they usually miss the uniqueness of each testimony. Others emphasize the differences and speculate on the Gospel constructs, but the fact of the resurrection usually becomes lost in the details of these human constructs. Both are attempts at protecting the essence of faith and reason in different ways.<\/p>\n<h5>The Empty Tomb<\/h5>\n<p>Many explanations have been given concerning the empty tomb. Some said the body was stolen by the disciples (already suggested by Mt 28:13), but then one needs to explain the church on the basis of fraud. Others have said that the Jews could have stolen the body, or the disciples could have mistaken the tomb, but then the body would soon have been produced by the enemies. Others have said that Jesus could have lapsed into a swoon, reviving later in the cold tomb, but then the result would hardly have inspired the power of the Christian church. These explanations are all rationalistic attempts based upon a preconception that an actual resurrection of Jesus could not have happened.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of the material differences, and while the Gospel writers have used a great deal of common material in their tomb stories, they themselves refrain from employing the tomb as a basis for resurrection faith. With the exception of John 20:8, the empty tomb engendered surprise and fear. Indeed, it seemed to be an idle tale (Lk 24:11). It is not the tomb stories but the appearances of Jesus after his resurrection that gave rise to faith.<\/p>\n<h5>The Appearances<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the tomb stories, there is little commonality of material in the appearances. Yet the appearances are the basis for faith that the unbelievable happened. An enemy like Paul was converted into a zealous apostle (Acts 9:1-22; 1 Cor 15:8). A fearful fisherman like Peter abandoned his nets (Jn 21). A doubter like Thomas uttered early Christianity’s greatest confession, calling Jesus “my Lord and my God” (20:24-28). And two weary travelers to Emmaus found new zeal to return quickly to Jerusalem and share the news about their encounter with the risen Jesus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have debated the nature of these appearances. Starting from Paul’s list of appearances (1 Cor 15:5-8), some have argued that all appearances are of the same nature, and since the Damascus-road appearance to Paul recorded in Acts seems to have been of a spiritual nature (Acts 9:1-9; cf. 22:6-11; 26:12-19), then all the appearances must have been similar. Statements that the risen Jesus was touchable (Lk 24:41-43) are rejected as later accretions to an earlier vision-type tradition. This type of argument is based on presuppositions of the impossibility of a bodily resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>Another theory was based on the division between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith. According to this view, the resurrection was not to be regarded as a fact of history but as an experience of the faith of the disciples. The issue, however, is that the eyewitnesses of Jesus’ resurrection proclaimed the event as a historical, palpable reality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSignificanceofChristsResurrection\">The Significance of Christ’s Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>Several people were raised from the dead, as recorded in the Bible. A widow’s son was raised by Elijah, another widow’s son was raised by Jesus, and Lazarus was raised by Jesus. However, their revitalization (or resuscitation) is not the same as Christ’s resurrection. They arose only to die again; he arose to live forevermore. They arose still doomed by corruptibility; he arose incorruptible. They arose with no change to their constitution; he arose in a significantly different form.<\/p>\n<p>When the Lord arose, three significant things happened to him. He was glorified, he was transfigured, and he became spirit. All three happened simultaneously. When he was resurrected, he was glorified (see Lk 24:26). At the same time, his body was transfigured into a glorious one (Phil 3:21). Equally so—and quite mysteriously—he became life-giving spirit (1 Cor 15:45).<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the Lord’s crucifixion and resurrection, he declared, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Truly, truly, I say unto you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it abides alone; but if it dies, it brings forth many grains” (Jn 12:23-24; literal). This declaration provides the best picture of resurrection. Paul also used this illustration. He likened the resurrection glory to a grain being sown in death and then coming forth in life. Actually, Paul used this illustration when answering two questions the Corinthians posed about resurrection: (1) How are the dead raised? and (2) With what sort of body do they come? (1 Cor 15:35).<\/p>\n<p>To the first question Paul responded, “Foolish man, what you sow is not made alive unless it dies” (1 Cor 15:36). This follows perfectly the Lord’s saying in John 12:24, and the two explain each other. The grain must die before it can be quickened. Paul devotes more explanation to the second question; and the Spirit inspired his sublime utterance to unfold this mystery. Using the same natural example of the grain of wheat, Paul revealed that the body that comes forth in resurrection is altogether different in form from that which had been sown. Through an organic process, the single bare grain is transformed into a stalk of wheat. In essence, the grain and the stalk are one and the same—the latter simply being the living growth and expressed expansion of the former. In short, the stalk is the glory of the grain, or the glorified grain. This illustration shows that Jesus’ resurrected body was altogether different from the one that was buried. In death, he had been sown in corruption, dishonor, and weakness; in resurrection, he came forth in incorruption, glory, and power. The natural body that Jesus possessed as a man became a spiritual body, and at the same time Christ became “life-giving spirit.”<\/p>\n<p>With this new spiritual existence, Christ, as spirit and through the Holy Spirit, could indwell millions of believers simultaneously. Before the resurrection, Jesus was limited by his mortal body; after his resurrection, Jesus could be experienced illimitably by all his believers. Before his resurrection, Christ could dwell only among his believers; after his resurrection, he could dwell in his believers. Because Christ became spirit through resurrection, he can be experienced by those he indwells. The Spirit of Christ now makes Christ very real and experiential to us.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus entered into a new kind of existence when he was raised from the dead because he was glorified and simultaneously became spirit—or, to coin a term, he was “pneumafied” (from the Greek word for “spirit,” <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>). It appears that when he arose the indwelling Spirit penetrated and saturated his body so as to constitute his entire being with spirit. Recent studies in the area of pneumatology (the study of the Spirit) point out that the risen Christ and the Spirit were united via Christ’s resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>William Milligan, the author of the best English classic on the subject of the resurrection, said that the risen Christ is spirit. In that classic, called <em>The Resurrection of Our Lord<\/em>, he wrote the following:<\/p>\n<p>The condition of our Lord after His Resurrection was viewed by the sacred writers as essentially a state of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span> (spirit). Not indeed that our Lord had then no body, for it is the constant lesson of Scripture that a body was possessed by him; but that the deepest, the fundamental characteristic of His state, interpenetrating even the body, and moulding it into a complete adaptation to and harmony with His spirit, was <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span><em>.<\/em> In other words, it is proposed to inquire whether the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span> in the New Testament is not used as a short description of what our Lord was after His Resurrection, in contrast with what He was during the days of His humiliation upon earth.<\/p>\n<p>Milligan went on from there to show that several Scriptures affirm that the resurrected Christ is spirit. He cited 1 Corinthians 6:17 to show that the believer who is joined with the risen Lord must be joined to him as spirit, because he who is joined to the Lord is said to be “one spirit” with him. He used 2 Corinthians 3:17-18 to demonstrate that the Lord who is the Spirit is none other than the risen Christ. He also employed 1 Timothy 3:16, Romans 1:3-4, and Hebrews 9:14 to prove that the risen Lord is spirit.<\/p>\n<p>When we read the last chapters of the Gospels, we realize that a great change had transpired in our Lord after the resurrection. By entering into glory, he had entered into a new sphere of existence. At one moment he was visible; in another he became invisible (Lk 24:31). He was defying the limitations of space and perhaps even time. In the early morning of the day of resurrection, he appeared to Mary Magdalene in the garden (Jn 20:11-17), then to some of the other women (Mt 28:9). After this, he ascended to his Father (Jn 20:17). Then he returned to appear to Peter, who had gone home (Jn 20:10; Lk 24:34). On the same day, in the late afternoon, he took a seven-mile (11.3-kilometer) walk with two disciples on their way to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-33), following which he appeared to the disciples as they were assembled in a closed room somewhere in Jerusalem (Lk 24:33-48; Jn 20:19-23). It is nearly impossible to follow a sequential, chronological order of all these happenings. What Jesus did was humanly impossible. How could he make all of these appearances on the same day? All we can say is that resurrection greatly changed his sphere of existence. As spirit, and yet with a body—a glorified one—he was no longer limited by time and space.<\/p>\n<p> Through resurrection, Jesus had acquired a different form (see Mk 16:12). As to his person, he was still the same; the Jesus who walked in Galilee and was crucified at Calvary is the same Jesus who arose. His person had not changed, nor will it ever; it is immutable. But his form did change; he is now life-giving spirit. As such, Christ is able to indwell all of his believers.<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection and regeneration are closely linked in the Scriptures—in the same way that crucifixion and redemption form an inseparable unity. As redemption was not possible without Christ’s crucifixion, so regeneration is not possible without Christ’s resurrection. The Scripture plainly says that we have been born again through the resurrection of Christ (1 Pt 1:23).<\/p>\n<p>After Christ was raised from the dead, he called the disciples his brothers (Mt 28:10; Jn 20:19), and he declared that his God was now their God, and his Father their Father. Through resurrection, the disciples had become the brothers of Jesus, possessing the same divine life and the same Father. As the firstborn from among the dead (Col 1:18; Rv 1:18), Jesus Christ became the firstborn among many brothers (Rom 8:29).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ResurrectioninGeneral\">Resurrection in General<\/p>\n<p>Paul looked for the Day of the Lord when the dead in Christ would be raised and those who were still alive would join the dead in final victory (1 Thes 4:15-18). There was no doubt in his mind that this resurrection was a glorious expectation, that it involved some type of a personalized body, and that this body would not be physical but spiritual (1 Cor 15:35-44). Paul did not speak of two resurrections, as do the Johannine texts (e.g., Jn 5:29), but merely of the resurrection to life. Perhaps the Revelation of John provides the best clue in understanding NT thought on this issue because it refers to the blessing of being part of the first resurrection (Rv 20:5-6). Although in Revelation the term “resurrection” is not used in connection with judgment, the appearance at the judgment seat and the verdict of the second death in the lake of fire indicate that a resurrection to judgment will hardly be of the same essence as resurrection to life.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ResurrectionandGnosticism\">Resurrection and Gnosticism<\/p>\n<p>Gnostic eschatology is indebted to the Greek view of immortality and involves the shedding of the bodily husk in the spiritual ascent of the devotee to the Pleroma, or Gnostic heaven. Because of the way Gnostics used words, the Gospel of Philip is a helpful window for understanding the Gnostic twisting of ideas. There it is argued that “those who say that the Lord died first and [then] arose are in error; because he first arose and [then] died. If anyone does not attain the resurrection first, will he not die?” (Philip 56:15-19). The concept of resurrection is de-eschatologized and defined not in terms of a truly future expectation of resurrection but in terms of a realized spiritual awakening in this world. The Gospel of Philip is also useful in perceiving why in 2 Timothy 2:17-19 the criticism was so severe against Hymenaeus and Philetus for holding that the resurrection was past. Clearly, realized eschatology was rejected in the Pauline community and by the church when it appeared in Gnosticism. And it should continue to be rejected by the church in the present day.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Eschatology; Second Coming of Christ; Spirit.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RESURRECTION<\/h3>\n<p>Act of being raised from the dead, used in the Bible in three different contexts: (1) It refers to miraculous raising of the dead back to earthly life, such as when Elijah raised a boy (1 Kgs 17:8-24), Elisha raised the Shunammite’s son (2 Kgs 4:18-37), Jesus raised both Jairus’s daughter (Mk 5:35-43) and Lazarus (Jn 11:17-44), Peter raised Dorcas (Acts 9:36-42), and Paul raised Eutychus (20:9-12). There is no hint that these resuscitations would prevent future death. (2) It refers most frequently to the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (3) It also refers to the eschatological resurrection of mankind at the end of time for punishment or reward (Jn 5:29; cf. Rv 20:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Resurrection in the Old Testament and Judaism<\/p>\n<p>• The Resurrection of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>• The Resurrection Accounts<\/p>\n<p>• The Significance of Christ’s Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>• Resurrection in General<\/p>\n<p>• Resurrection and Gnosticism<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ResurrectionintheOldTestamentandJudaism\">Resurrection in the Old Testament and Judaism<\/p>\n<p>The concept of resurrection to eternal life developed slowly in Israel. Life and death were limited to physical existence in this world. Death meant leaving this world and entering a shadowy existence known as Sheol, the place of the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">rephaim<\/span><em>,<\/em> or shades (Is 14:9), a place of hopelessness (2 Sm 12:23; Jb 7:9-10). The tragedy of Sheol was that a person was cut off from fellowship with God. At that stage of Israel’s thought, there seemed little hope for resurrection (Pss 6:4-5; 88:10-12).<\/p>\n<p>But in the midst of hopelessness concerning a personal future, Israel developed a sense of faithfulness to God. In spite of the fact that the future was not clear, Job cried helplessly, “If a man dies, will he live again?” (Jb 14:14). As Job sought for the seemingly impossible, the difficult passage in Job 19:25-26 suggests the reality of resurrection by a living redeemer (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>While some would argue that Hosea 6:1-3 suggests a resurrection, it is more likely that Israel considered it to be a promise of God’s continuing care, even when it experienced defeat at the hands of its enemies. Whether Paul saw in the third-day statement of Hosea a reference to Jesus is difficult to assess. This passage, along with texts like the dry bones of Ezekiel (ch 37), focus primarily on giving Israel hope in spite of defeat. But they may have become part of a developing sense in Israel that after death there should be something more.<\/p>\n<p>In Daniel 12:2, however, there is a sure reference to the resurrection of the dead. Indeed, the text announced a twofold resurrection of Jews: some to eternal life and some to eternal contempt. But there was no general resurrection of all people suggested by this text.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, views began to solidify. The theologically conservative Sadducees would have nothing to do with the new ideas of resurrection and the afterlife. They continued to argue that there was no mention of resurrection in the writings of Moses, that life pertained to this earthly realm, and that the future hope was experienced through one’s children (Ecclus 46:12). Sheol, the place of the dead, was devoid of relationship with God and was a place of hapless existence. The Sadducean opinion of the resurrection is generally well known to Christians because of the encounter between Jesus and the Sadducees when they sought to ensnare him concerning the wife of seven brothers. Jesus rejected their views of the resurrection, of God, and of the Scriptures (Mk 12:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees, along with the Essenes and those at Qumran, believed in resurrection. A twofold pattern of resurrection was suggested by the famous eschatological passages of 2 Esdras 7 and the Apocalypse of Baruch 50–51. Both texts may be as late as the first century <span>AD<\/span>. In the Similitudes of 1 Enoch, the righteous Jews could generally expect resurrection, but not the wicked (1 Enoch 1:46, 51, 62). But elsewhere in Enoch there is a hint that some wicked may be raised for judgment (vv 22, 67, 90). The resurrection of the righteous in these texts would generally be linked to a spiritual type of body, yet in 2 Maccabees 7:14ff., the view seems less developed and more physical. The ascetics at Qumran expected a resurrection in the great Day of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>While in Judaism there was a growing sense of an eschatological day of resurrection and reckoning, there was no hint anywhere of a resurrection of the Messiah. Such an idea had to await the historical reality of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheResurrectionofJesusChrist\">The Resurrection of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection of Christ is the central point of Christianity. So important was the resurrection for Paul that he hinged both preaching and faith upon its validity. He considered that a Christianity without the resurrection would be empty and meaningless (1 Cor 15:12-19). Indeed, the resurrection for him was the unveiling of God’s power in Jesus (Rom 1:4).<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection of Christ is the presupposition behind other texts of the NT as well. Rebirth to a living hope is based upon the resurrection (1 Pt 1:3). It is the foundation for witness and fellowship with God, because the living Lord has been seen and touched (1 Jn 1:1-4). It is the bedrock thesis for ministry and apostleship (Acts 1:21-25). The Gospels likewise would hardly have been good news if they did not conclude with Christ’s resurrection. Christ’s resurrection is the prototype for all the believers, who will experience resurrection when Christ returns.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheResurrectionAccounts\">The Resurrection Accounts<\/p>\n<p>While the resurrection of Jesus Christ is the very essence of Christianity, it has been the subject of considerable debate. Scholars have frequently noted the variations that are present in the accounts. How many and who were the women at the tomb? Was there one (Mt; Mk) or were there two (Lk; Jn) angels at the tomb? Did the women come to anoint the body (Mk; Lk) or to see the tomb (Mt)? Did the women say nothing to anyone because of fear (Mk), or did they report to the disciples (Mt)? What was the order of the appearances, and did they take place in Jerusalem (Lk; Jn 20) or in Galilee (Mt; Jn 21) or in both places? Can the appearances be harmonized? What kind of body did Jesus possess? These and many other questions have been the watershed for a great deal of contemporary scholarly debate.<\/p>\n<p>Many of these questions were not first discovered by recent scholars. Tatian in the second century sought to remove the questions by composing his <em>Diatessaron<\/em> (harmony) in hopes that Christians would accept his work as a variant-free substitute for the Gospels. Although Christians liked the harmony, they continued to faithfully transmit the Gospels, because they believed that in them, by divine inspiration, God had provided a powerful witness concerning his Son. Many today still try the way of harmonization in an effort to deal with the minutia of historical questions, but they usually miss the uniqueness of each testimony. Others emphasize the differences and speculate on the Gospel constructs, but the fact of the resurrection usually becomes lost in the details of these human constructs. Both are attempts at protecting the essence of faith and reason in different ways.<\/p>\n<h5>The Empty Tomb<\/h5>\n<p>Many explanations have been given concerning the empty tomb. Some said the body was stolen by the disciples (already suggested by Mt 28:13), but then one needs to explain the church on the basis of fraud. Others have said that the Jews could have stolen the body, or the disciples could have mistaken the tomb, but then the body would soon have been produced by the enemies. Others have said that Jesus could have lapsed into a swoon, reviving later in the cold tomb, but then the result would hardly have inspired the power of the Christian church. These explanations are all rationalistic attempts based upon a preconception that an actual resurrection of Jesus could not have happened.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of the material differences, and while the Gospel writers have used a great deal of common material in their tomb stories, they themselves refrain from employing the tomb as a basis for resurrection faith. With the exception of John 20:8, the empty tomb engendered surprise and fear. Indeed, it seemed to be an idle tale (Lk 24:11). It is not the tomb stories but the appearances of Jesus after his resurrection that gave rise to faith.<\/p>\n<h5>The Appearances<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the tomb stories, there is little commonality of material in the appearances. Yet the appearances are the basis for faith that the unbelievable happened. An enemy like Paul was converted into a zealous apostle (Acts 9:1-22; 1 Cor 15:8). A fearful fisherman like Peter abandoned his nets (Jn 21). A doubter like Thomas uttered early Christianity’s greatest confession, calling Jesus “my Lord and my God” (20:24-28). And two weary travelers to Emmaus found new zeal to return quickly to Jerusalem and share the news about their encounter with the risen Jesus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have debated the nature of these appearances. Starting from Paul’s list of appearances (1 Cor 15:5-8), some have argued that all appearances are of the same nature, and since the Damascus-road appearance to Paul recorded in Acts seems to have been of a spiritual nature (Acts 9:1-9; cf. 22:6-11; 26:12-19), then all the appearances must have been similar. Statements that the risen Jesus was touchable (Lk 24:41-43) are rejected as later accretions to an earlier vision-type tradition. This type of argument is based on presuppositions of the impossibility of a bodily resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>Another theory was based on the division between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith. According to this view, the resurrection was not to be regarded as a fact of history but as an experience of the faith of the disciples. The issue, however, is that the eyewitnesses of Jesus’ resurrection proclaimed the event as a historical, palpable reality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSignificanceofChristsResurrection\">The Significance of Christ’s Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>Several people were raised from the dead, as recorded in the Bible. A widow’s son was raised by Elijah, another widow’s son was raised by Jesus, and Lazarus was raised by Jesus. However, their revitalization (or resuscitation) is not the same as Christ’s resurrection. They arose only to die again; he arose to live forevermore. They arose still doomed by corruptibility; he arose incorruptible. They arose with no change to their constitution; he arose in a significantly different form.<\/p>\n<p>When the Lord arose, three significant things happened to him. He was glorified, he was transfigured, and he became spirit. All three happened simultaneously. When he was resurrected, he was glorified (see Lk 24:26). At the same time, his body was transfigured into a glorious one (Phil 3:21). Equally so—and quite mysteriously—he became life-giving spirit (1 Cor 15:45).<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the Lord’s crucifixion and resurrection, he declared, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Truly, truly, I say unto you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it abides alone; but if it dies, it brings forth many grains” (Jn 12:23-24; literal). This declaration provides the best picture of resurrection. Paul also used this illustration. He likened the resurrection glory to a grain being sown in death and then coming forth in life. Actually, Paul used this illustration when answering two questions the Corinthians posed about resurrection: (1) How are the dead raised? and (2) With what sort of body do they come? (1 Cor 15:35).<\/p>\n<p>To the first question Paul responded, “Foolish man, what you sow is not made alive unless it dies” (1 Cor 15:36). This follows perfectly the Lord’s saying in John 12:24, and the two explain each other. The grain must die before it can be quickened. Paul devotes more explanation to the second question; and the Spirit inspired his sublime utterance to unfold this mystery. Using the same natural example of the grain of wheat, Paul revealed that the body that comes forth in resurrection is altogether different in form from that which had been sown. Through an organic process, the single bare grain is transformed into a stalk of wheat. In essence, the grain and the stalk are one and the same—the latter simply being the living growth and expressed expansion of the former. In short, the stalk is the glory of the grain, or the glorified grain. This illustration shows that Jesus’ resurrected body was altogether different from the one that was buried. In death, he had been sown in corruption, dishonor, and weakness; in resurrection, he came forth in incorruption, glory, and power. The natural body that Jesus possessed as a man became a spiritual body, and at the same time Christ became “life-giving spirit.”<\/p>\n<p>With this new spiritual existence, Christ, as spirit and through the Holy Spirit, could indwell millions of believers simultaneously. Before the resurrection, Jesus was limited by his mortal body; after his resurrection, Jesus could be experienced illimitably by all his believers. Before his resurrection, Christ could dwell only among his believers; after his resurrection, he could dwell in his believers. Because Christ became spirit through resurrection, he can be experienced by those he indwells. The Spirit of Christ now makes Christ very real and experiential to us.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus entered into a new kind of existence when he was raised from the dead because he was glorified and simultaneously became spirit—or, to coin a term, he was “pneumafied” (from the Greek word for “spirit,” <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>). It appears that when he arose the indwelling Spirit penetrated and saturated his body so as to constitute his entire being with spirit. Recent studies in the area of pneumatology (the study of the Spirit) point out that the risen Christ and the Spirit were united via Christ’s resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>William Milligan, the author of the best English classic on the subject of the resurrection, said that the risen Christ is spirit. In that classic, called <em>The Resurrection of Our Lord<\/em>, he wrote the following:<\/p>\n<p>The condition of our Lord after His Resurrection was viewed by the sacred writers as essentially a state of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span> (spirit). Not indeed that our Lord had then no body, for it is the constant lesson of Scripture that a body was possessed by him; but that the deepest, the fundamental characteristic of His state, interpenetrating even the body, and moulding it into a complete adaptation to and harmony with His spirit, was <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span><em>.<\/em> In other words, it is proposed to inquire whether the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span> in the New Testament is not used as a short description of what our Lord was after His Resurrection, in contrast with what He was during the days of His humiliation upon earth.<\/p>\n<p>Milligan went on from there to show that several Scriptures affirm that the resurrected Christ is spirit. He cited 1 Corinthians 6:17 to show that the believer who is joined with the risen Lord must be joined to him as spirit, because he who is joined to the Lord is said to be “one spirit” with him. He used 2 Corinthians 3:17-18 to demonstrate that the Lord who is the Spirit is none other than the risen Christ. He also employed 1 Timothy 3:16, Romans 1:3-4, and Hebrews 9:14 to prove that the risen Lord is spirit.<\/p>\n<p>When we read the last chapters of the Gospels, we realize that a great change had transpired in our Lord after the resurrection. By entering into glory, he had entered into a new sphere of existence. At one moment he was visible; in another he became invisible (Lk 24:31). He was defying the limitations of space and perhaps even time. In the early morning of the day of resurrection, he appeared to Mary Magdalene in the garden (Jn 20:11-17), then to some of the other women (Mt 28:9). After this, he ascended to his Father (Jn 20:17). Then he returned to appear to Peter, who had gone home (Jn 20:10; Lk 24:34). On the same day, in the late afternoon, he took a seven-mile (11.3-kilometer) walk with two disciples on their way to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-33), following which he appeared to the disciples as they were assembled in a closed room somewhere in Jerusalem (Lk 24:33-48; Jn 20:19-23). It is nearly impossible to follow a sequential, chronological order of all these happenings. What Jesus did was humanly impossible. How could he make all of these appearances on the same day? All we can say is that resurrection greatly changed his sphere of existence. As spirit, and yet with a body—a glorified one—he was no longer limited by time and space.<\/p>\n<p> Through resurrection, Jesus had acquired a different form (see Mk 16:12). As to his person, he was still the same; the Jesus who walked in Galilee and was crucified at Calvary is the same Jesus who arose. His person had not changed, nor will it ever; it is immutable. But his form did change; he is now life-giving spirit. As such, Christ is able to indwell all of his believers.<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection and regeneration are closely linked in the Scriptures—in the same way that crucifixion and redemption form an inseparable unity. As redemption was not possible without Christ’s crucifixion, so regeneration is not possible without Christ’s resurrection. The Scripture plainly says that we have been born again through the resurrection of Christ (1 Pt 1:23).<\/p>\n<p>After Christ was raised from the dead, he called the disciples his brothers (Mt 28:10; Jn 20:19), and he declared that his God was now their God, and his Father their Father. Through resurrection, the disciples had become the brothers of Jesus, possessing the same divine life and the same Father. As the firstborn from among the dead (Col 1:18; Rv 1:18), Jesus Christ became the firstborn among many brothers (Rom 8:29).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ResurrectioninGeneral\">Resurrection in General<\/p>\n<p>Paul looked for the Day of the Lord when the dead in Christ would be raised and those who were still alive would join the dead in final victory (1 Thes 4:15-18). There was no doubt in his mind that this resurrection was a glorious expectation, that it involved some type of a personalized body, and that this body would not be physical but spiritual (1 Cor 15:35-44). Paul did not speak of two resurrections, as do the Johannine texts (e.g., Jn 5:29), but merely of the resurrection to life. Perhaps the Revelation of John provides the best clue in understanding NT thought on this issue because it refers to the blessing of being part of the first resurrection (Rv 20:5-6). Although in Revelation the term “resurrection” is not used in connection with judgment, the appearance at the judgment seat and the verdict of the second death in the lake of fire indicate that a resurrection to judgment will hardly be of the same essence as resurrection to life.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ResurrectionandGnosticism\">Resurrection and Gnosticism<\/p>\n<p>Gnostic eschatology is indebted to the Greek view of immortality and involves the shedding of the bodily husk in the spiritual ascent of the devotee to the Pleroma, or Gnostic heaven. Because of the way Gnostics used words, the Gospel of Philip is a helpful window for understanding the Gnostic twisting of ideas. There it is argued that “those who say that the Lord died first and [then] arose are in error; because he first arose and [then] died. If anyone does not attain the resurrection first, will he not die?” (Philip 56:15-19). The concept of resurrection is de-eschatologized and defined not in terms of a truly future expectation of resurrection but in terms of a realized spiritual awakening in this world. The Gospel of Philip is also useful in perceiving why in 2 Timothy 2:17-19 the criticism was so severe against Hymenaeus and Philetus for holding that the resurrection was past. Clearly, realized eschatology was rejected in the Pauline community and by the church when it appeared in Gnosticism. And it should continue to be rejected by the church in the present day.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Eschatology; Second Coming of Christ; Spirit.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RESURRECTION Act of being raised from the dead, used in the Bible in three different contexts: (1) It refers to miraculous raising of the dead back to earthly life, such as when Elijah raised a boy (1 Kgs 17:8-24), Elisha raised the Shunammite’s son (2 Kgs 4:18-37), Jesus raised both Jairus’s daughter (Mk 5:35-43) and Lazarus (Jn 11:17-44), Peter raised Dorcas (Acts 9:36-42), and Paul raised Eutychus (20:9-12). There is no hint that these resuscitations would prevent future death. (2) It refe...","summary_en":"RESURRECTION Act of being raised from the dead, used in the Bible in three different contexts: (1) It refers to miraculous raising of the dead back to earthly life, such as when Elijah raised a boy (1 Kgs 17:8-24), Elisha raised the Shunammite’s son (2 Kgs 4:18-37), Jesus raised both Jairus’s daughter (Mk 5:35-43) and Lazarus (Jn 11:17-44), Peter raised Dorcas (Acts 9:36-42), and Paul raised Eutychus (20:9-12). There is no hint that these resuscitations would prevent future death. (2) It refe...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"30":[{"id":20193,"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":68051,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Purpose of the Judgments","title_en":"The Purpose of the Judgments","content_ro":"<h3>The Purpose of the Judgments<\/h3>\n<p>What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues:<\/p>\n<li>At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure.<\/li>\n<li>The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet sought death rather than looking to God (9:6). Many prefer to die rather than to admit their sin.<\/li>\n<li>In the sixth seal (6:12-17), the people cried for the rocks to fall on them and hide them from “the wrath of the Lamb” (6:16). Their seeking escape from judgment shows fear rather than trusting in God.<\/li>\n<li>Revelation emphasizes the ultimate justice of God (16:5-7) and the principle of retribution. Believers and unbelievers alike will receive exactly what they deserve (see 2:23; 11:18; 14:13; 18:6; 20:12-13; 22:12).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are God’s partial answer to the prayers of the saints for retribution. Judgment occurs in God’s time, not ours (6:9-11; 8:2-5).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments, like the plagues on Egypt, disprove the power of the earthly gods and of God’s enemies (Exod 7:8-12; 12:12; cp. Rev 13:4-17; 19:20-21; 20:9-10).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are a part of God’s mission and offer a last chance to repent (14:6-7; see 9:20-21; 16:9, 11, 21).<\/li>\n<p>Even though God has made it clear that sin is wrong and judgment is coming (Rom 2:5-11), many people still refuse to repent and accept God’s grace (Rom 1:32). Even in the final days, when God sends his witnesses to prophesy concerning the coming destruction, many people will prefer to align themselves with evil forces and will gloat over the demise of God’s prophets (11:3-10). Those who thus oppose God and flee from him will eventually be excluded from his presence.<\/p>\n<p>Judgment against disobedience and evil ways is inevitable (see Rom 1:18–2:11). Yet God patiently waits for repentance and offers his grace (see Rom 2:4; 2 Pet 3:8-10). As such, the warnings of these judgments can serve as an opportunity for change.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:6; 12:12; Lev 26:25; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; Ps 103:6; Prov 16:11; Isa 13:11; 26:21; 59:18; Jer 5:1-9; Ezek 11:21; 39:21-24; Zeph 1:12; Mal 3:5; Luke 12:47; John 5:30; Rom 2:2-11; Heb 2:1-4; 10:29; Rev 9:20-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Purpose of the Judgments<\/h3>\n<p>What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues:<\/p>\n<li>At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure.<\/li>\n<li>The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet sought death rather than looking to God (9:6). Many prefer to die rather than to admit their sin.<\/li>\n<li>In the sixth seal (6:12-17), the people cried for the rocks to fall on them and hide them from “the wrath of the Lamb” (6:16). Their seeking escape from judgment shows fear rather than trusting in God.<\/li>\n<li>Revelation emphasizes the ultimate justice of God (16:5-7) and the principle of retribution. Believers and unbelievers alike will receive exactly what they deserve (see 2:23; 11:18; 14:13; 18:6; 20:12-13; 22:12).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are God’s partial answer to the prayers of the saints for retribution. Judgment occurs in God’s time, not ours (6:9-11; 8:2-5).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments, like the plagues on Egypt, disprove the power of the earthly gods and of God’s enemies (Exod 7:8-12; 12:12; cp. Rev 13:4-17; 19:20-21; 20:9-10).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are a part of God’s mission and offer a last chance to repent (14:6-7; see 9:20-21; 16:9, 11, 21).<\/li>\n<p>Even though God has made it clear that sin is wrong and judgment is coming (Rom 2:5-11), many people still refuse to repent and accept God’s grace (Rom 1:32). Even in the final days, when God sends his witnesses to prophesy concerning the coming destruction, many people will prefer to align themselves with evil forces and will gloat over the demise of God’s prophets (11:3-10). Those who thus oppose God and flee from him will eventually be excluded from his presence.<\/p>\n<p>Judgment against disobedience and evil ways is inevitable (see Rom 1:18–2:11). Yet God patiently waits for repentance and offers his grace (see Rom 2:4; 2 Pet 3:8-10). As such, the warnings of these judgments can serve as an opportunity for change.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:6; 12:12; Lev 26:25; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; Ps 103:6; Prov 16:11; Isa 13:11; 26:21; 59:18; Jer 5:1-9; Ezek 11:21; 39:21-24; Zeph 1:12; Mal 3:5; Luke 12:47; John 5:30; Rom 2:2-11; Heb 2:1-4; 10:29; Rev 9:20-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Purpose of the Judgments What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues: At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure. The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet s...","summary_en":"The Purpose of the Judgments What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues: At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure. The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95677,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Purpose of the Judgments","title_en":"The Purpose of the Judgments","content_ro":"<h3>The Purpose of the Judgments<\/h3>\n<p>What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues:<\/p>\n<li>At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure.<\/li>\n<li>The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet sought death rather than looking to God (9:6). Many prefer to die rather than to admit their sin.<\/li>\n<li>In the sixth seal (6:12-17), the people cried for the rocks to fall on them and hide them from “the wrath of the Lamb” (6:16). Their seeking escape from judgment shows fear rather than trusting in God.<\/li>\n<li>Revelation emphasizes the ultimate justice of God (16:5-7) and the principle of retribution. Believers and unbelievers alike will receive exactly what they deserve (see 2:23; 11:18; 14:13; 18:6; 20:12-13; 22:12).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are God’s partial answer to the prayers of the saints for retribution. Judgment occurs in God’s time, not ours (6:9-11; 8:2-5).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments, like the plagues on Egypt, disprove the power of the earthly gods and of God’s enemies (Exod 7:8-12; 12:12; cp. Rev 13:4-17; 19:20-21; 20:9-10).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are a part of God’s mission and offer a last chance to repent (14:6-7; see 9:20-21; 16:9, 11, 21).<\/li>\n<p>Even though God has made it clear that sin is wrong and judgment is coming (Rom 2:5-11), many people still refuse to repent and accept God’s grace (Rom 1:32). Even in the final days, when God sends his witnesses to prophesy concerning the coming destruction, many people will prefer to align themselves with evil forces and will gloat over the demise of God’s prophets (11:3-10). Those who thus oppose God and flee from him will eventually be excluded from his presence.<\/p>\n<p>Judgment against disobedience and evil ways is inevitable (see Rom 1:18–2:11). Yet God patiently waits for repentance and offers his grace (see Rom 2:4; 2 Pet 3:8-10). As such, the warnings of these judgments can serve as an opportunity for change.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:6; 12:12; Lev 26:25; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; Ps 103:6; Prov 16:11; Isa 13:11; 26:21; 59:18; Jer 5:1-9; Ezek 11:21; 39:21-24; Zeph 1:12; Mal 3:5; Luke 12:47; John 5:30; Rom 2:2-11; Heb 2:1-4; 10:29; Rev 9:20-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Purpose of the Judgments<\/h3>\n<p>What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues:<\/p>\n<li>At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure.<\/li>\n<li>The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet sought death rather than looking to God (9:6). Many prefer to die rather than to admit their sin.<\/li>\n<li>In the sixth seal (6:12-17), the people cried for the rocks to fall on them and hide them from “the wrath of the Lamb” (6:16). Their seeking escape from judgment shows fear rather than trusting in God.<\/li>\n<li>Revelation emphasizes the ultimate justice of God (16:5-7) and the principle of retribution. Believers and unbelievers alike will receive exactly what they deserve (see 2:23; 11:18; 14:13; 18:6; 20:12-13; 22:12).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are God’s partial answer to the prayers of the saints for retribution. Judgment occurs in God’s time, not ours (6:9-11; 8:2-5).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments, like the plagues on Egypt, disprove the power of the earthly gods and of God’s enemies (Exod 7:8-12; 12:12; cp. Rev 13:4-17; 19:20-21; 20:9-10).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are a part of God’s mission and offer a last chance to repent (14:6-7; see 9:20-21; 16:9, 11, 21).<\/li>\n<p>Even though God has made it clear that sin is wrong and judgment is coming (Rom 2:5-11), many people still refuse to repent and accept God’s grace (Rom 1:32). Even in the final days, when God sends his witnesses to prophesy concerning the coming destruction, many people will prefer to align themselves with evil forces and will gloat over the demise of God’s prophets (11:3-10). Those who thus oppose God and flee from him will eventually be excluded from his presence.<\/p>\n<p>Judgment against disobedience and evil ways is inevitable (see Rom 1:18–2:11). Yet God patiently waits for repentance and offers his grace (see Rom 2:4; 2 Pet 3:8-10). As such, the warnings of these judgments can serve as an opportunity for change.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:6; 12:12; Lev 26:25; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; Ps 103:6; Prov 16:11; Isa 13:11; 26:21; 59:18; Jer 5:1-9; Ezek 11:21; 39:21-24; Zeph 1:12; Mal 3:5; Luke 12:47; John 5:30; Rom 2:2-11; Heb 2:1-4; 10:29; Rev 9:20-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Purpose of the Judgments What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues: At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure. The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet s...","summary_en":"The Purpose of the Judgments What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues: At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure. The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123303,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Purpose of the Judgments","title_en":"The Purpose of the Judgments","content_ro":"<h3>The Purpose of the Judgments<\/h3>\n<p>What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues:<\/p>\n<li>At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure.<\/li>\n<li>The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet sought death rather than looking to God (9:6). Many prefer to die rather than to admit their sin.<\/li>\n<li>In the sixth seal (6:12-17), the people cried for the rocks to fall on them and hide them from “the wrath of the Lamb” (6:16). Their seeking escape from judgment shows fear rather than trusting in God.<\/li>\n<li>Revelation emphasizes the ultimate justice of God (16:5-7) and the principle of retribution. Believers and unbelievers alike will receive exactly what they deserve (see 2:23; 11:18; 14:13; 18:6; 20:12-13; 22:12).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are God’s partial answer to the prayers of the saints for retribution. Judgment occurs in God’s time, not ours (6:9-11; 8:2-5).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments, like the plagues on Egypt, disprove the power of the earthly gods and of God’s enemies (Exod 7:8-12; 12:12; cp. Rev 13:4-17; 19:20-21; 20:9-10).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are a part of God’s mission and offer a last chance to repent (14:6-7; see 9:20-21; 16:9, 11, 21).<\/li>\n<p>Even though God has made it clear that sin is wrong and judgment is coming (Rom 2:5-11), many people still refuse to repent and accept God’s grace (Rom 1:32). Even in the final days, when God sends his witnesses to prophesy concerning the coming destruction, many people will prefer to align themselves with evil forces and will gloat over the demise of God’s prophets (11:3-10). Those who thus oppose God and flee from him will eventually be excluded from his presence.<\/p>\n<p>Judgment against disobedience and evil ways is inevitable (see Rom 1:18–2:11). Yet God patiently waits for repentance and offers his grace (see Rom 2:4; 2 Pet 3:8-10). As such, the warnings of these judgments can serve as an opportunity for change.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:6; 12:12; Lev 26:25; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; Ps 103:6; Prov 16:11; Isa 13:11; 26:21; 59:18; Jer 5:1-9; Ezek 11:21; 39:21-24; Zeph 1:12; Mal 3:5; Luke 12:47; John 5:30; Rom 2:2-11; Heb 2:1-4; 10:29; Rev 9:20-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Purpose of the Judgments<\/h3>\n<p>What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues:<\/p>\n<li>At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure.<\/li>\n<li>The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet sought death rather than looking to God (9:6). Many prefer to die rather than to admit their sin.<\/li>\n<li>In the sixth seal (6:12-17), the people cried for the rocks to fall on them and hide them from “the wrath of the Lamb” (6:16). Their seeking escape from judgment shows fear rather than trusting in God.<\/li>\n<li>Revelation emphasizes the ultimate justice of God (16:5-7) and the principle of retribution. Believers and unbelievers alike will receive exactly what they deserve (see 2:23; 11:18; 14:13; 18:6; 20:12-13; 22:12).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are God’s partial answer to the prayers of the saints for retribution. Judgment occurs in God’s time, not ours (6:9-11; 8:2-5).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments, like the plagues on Egypt, disprove the power of the earthly gods and of God’s enemies (Exod 7:8-12; 12:12; cp. Rev 13:4-17; 19:20-21; 20:9-10).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are a part of God’s mission and offer a last chance to repent (14:6-7; see 9:20-21; 16:9, 11, 21).<\/li>\n<p>Even though God has made it clear that sin is wrong and judgment is coming (Rom 2:5-11), many people still refuse to repent and accept God’s grace (Rom 1:32). Even in the final days, when God sends his witnesses to prophesy concerning the coming destruction, many people will prefer to align themselves with evil forces and will gloat over the demise of God’s prophets (11:3-10). Those who thus oppose God and flee from him will eventually be excluded from his presence.<\/p>\n<p>Judgment against disobedience and evil ways is inevitable (see Rom 1:18–2:11). Yet God patiently waits for repentance and offers his grace (see Rom 2:4; 2 Pet 3:8-10). As such, the warnings of these judgments can serve as an opportunity for change.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:6; 12:12; Lev 26:25; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; Ps 103:6; Prov 16:11; Isa 13:11; 26:21; 59:18; Jer 5:1-9; Ezek 11:21; 39:21-24; Zeph 1:12; Mal 3:5; Luke 12:47; John 5:30; Rom 2:2-11; Heb 2:1-4; 10:29; Rev 9:20-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Purpose of the Judgments What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues: At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure. The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet s...","summary_en":"The Purpose of the Judgments What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues: At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure. The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150929,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Purpose of the Judgments","title_en":"The Purpose of the Judgments","content_ro":"<h3>The Purpose of the Judgments<\/h3>\n<p>What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues:<\/p>\n<li>At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure.<\/li>\n<li>The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet sought death rather than looking to God (9:6). Many prefer to die rather than to admit their sin.<\/li>\n<li>In the sixth seal (6:12-17), the people cried for the rocks to fall on them and hide them from “the wrath of the Lamb” (6:16). Their seeking escape from judgment shows fear rather than trusting in God.<\/li>\n<li>Revelation emphasizes the ultimate justice of God (16:5-7) and the principle of retribution. Believers and unbelievers alike will receive exactly what they deserve (see 2:23; 11:18; 14:13; 18:6; 20:12-13; 22:12).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are God’s partial answer to the prayers of the saints for retribution. Judgment occurs in God’s time, not ours (6:9-11; 8:2-5).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments, like the plagues on Egypt, disprove the power of the earthly gods and of God’s enemies (Exod 7:8-12; 12:12; cp. Rev 13:4-17; 19:20-21; 20:9-10).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are a part of God’s mission and offer a last chance to repent (14:6-7; see 9:20-21; 16:9, 11, 21).<\/li>\n<p>Even though God has made it clear that sin is wrong and judgment is coming (Rom 2:5-11), many people still refuse to repent and accept God’s grace (Rom 1:32). Even in the final days, when God sends his witnesses to prophesy concerning the coming destruction, many people will prefer to align themselves with evil forces and will gloat over the demise of God’s prophets (11:3-10). Those who thus oppose God and flee from him will eventually be excluded from his presence.<\/p>\n<p>Judgment against disobedience and evil ways is inevitable (see Rom 1:18–2:11). Yet God patiently waits for repentance and offers his grace (see Rom 2:4; 2 Pet 3:8-10). As such, the warnings of these judgments can serve as an opportunity for change.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:6; 12:12; Lev 26:25; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; Ps 103:6; Prov 16:11; Isa 13:11; 26:21; 59:18; Jer 5:1-9; Ezek 11:21; 39:21-24; Zeph 1:12; Mal 3:5; Luke 12:47; John 5:30; Rom 2:2-11; Heb 2:1-4; 10:29; Rev 9:20-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Purpose of the Judgments<\/h3>\n<p>What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues:<\/p>\n<li>At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure.<\/li>\n<li>The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet sought death rather than looking to God (9:6). Many prefer to die rather than to admit their sin.<\/li>\n<li>In the sixth seal (6:12-17), the people cried for the rocks to fall on them and hide them from “the wrath of the Lamb” (6:16). Their seeking escape from judgment shows fear rather than trusting in God.<\/li>\n<li>Revelation emphasizes the ultimate justice of God (16:5-7) and the principle of retribution. Believers and unbelievers alike will receive exactly what they deserve (see 2:23; 11:18; 14:13; 18:6; 20:12-13; 22:12).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are God’s partial answer to the prayers of the saints for retribution. Judgment occurs in God’s time, not ours (6:9-11; 8:2-5).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments, like the plagues on Egypt, disprove the power of the earthly gods and of God’s enemies (Exod 7:8-12; 12:12; cp. Rev 13:4-17; 19:20-21; 20:9-10).<\/li>\n<li>The judgments are a part of God’s mission and offer a last chance to repent (14:6-7; see 9:20-21; 16:9, 11, 21).<\/li>\n<p>Even though God has made it clear that sin is wrong and judgment is coming (Rom 2:5-11), many people still refuse to repent and accept God’s grace (Rom 1:32). Even in the final days, when God sends his witnesses to prophesy concerning the coming destruction, many people will prefer to align themselves with evil forces and will gloat over the demise of God’s prophets (11:3-10). Those who thus oppose God and flee from him will eventually be excluded from his presence.<\/p>\n<p>Judgment against disobedience and evil ways is inevitable (see Rom 1:18–2:11). Yet God patiently waits for repentance and offers his grace (see Rom 2:4; 2 Pet 3:8-10). As such, the warnings of these judgments can serve as an opportunity for change.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:6; 12:12; Lev 26:25; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; Ps 103:6; Prov 16:11; Isa 13:11; 26:21; 59:18; Jer 5:1-9; Ezek 11:21; 39:21-24; Zeph 1:12; Mal 3:5; Luke 12:47; John 5:30; Rom 2:2-11; Heb 2:1-4; 10:29; Rev 9:20-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Purpose of the Judgments What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues: At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure. The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet s...","summary_en":"The Purpose of the Judgments What is the purpose of God’s judgments? Are they meant to bring about redemption or are they simply intended to destroy? The account of judgments in Revelation gives us some clues: At the end of the sixth trumpet, in spite of all the plagues, people “still refused to repent of their evil deeds and turn to God” (9:20-21). For some people, it does not matter what happens to them—they will not change even under pressure. The tormented sufferers of the fifth trumpet s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":56416,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:31-40<\/strong> God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:31-40<\/strong> God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:31-40 God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.","summary_en":"5:31-40 God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84042,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:31-40<\/strong> God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:31-40<\/strong> God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:31-40 God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.","summary_en":"5:31-40 God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111668,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:31-40<\/strong> God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:31-40<\/strong> God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:31-40 God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.","summary_en":"5:31-40 God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139294,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:31-40<\/strong> God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:31-40<\/strong> God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:31-40 God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.","summary_en":"5:31-40 God’s law requires more than one witness in a trial (Deut 17:6), so Jesus acknowledged that his own testimony was admissible only when confirmed by other witnesses. Thus, he introduced a series of witnesses for his defense.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"32":[{"id":20198,"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":56417,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:32","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>5:32<\/strong> The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>5:32<\/strong> The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:32 The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.","summary_en":"5:32 The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84043,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:32","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>5:32<\/strong> The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>5:32<\/strong> The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:32 The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.","summary_en":"5:32 The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111669,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:32","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>5:32<\/strong> The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>5:32<\/strong> The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:32 The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.","summary_en":"5:32 The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139295,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:32","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>5:32<\/strong> The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>5:32<\/strong> The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:32 The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.","summary_en":"5:32 The first witness for Jesus’ defense was God himself. Jesus might have had in mind God’s voice at his baptism (Mark 1:11) or the presence of God that enabled Jesus to perform miracles.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"33":[{"id":20390,"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":56418,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:33","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:33-35<\/strong> Jesus’ second witness was <em>John the Baptist<\/em><em>,<\/em> who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:33-35<\/strong> Jesus’ second witness was <em>John the Baptist<\/em><em>,<\/em> who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:33-35 Jesus’ second witness was John the Baptist, who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).","summary_en":"5:33-35 Jesus’ second witness was John the Baptist, who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84044,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:33","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:33-35<\/strong> Jesus’ second witness was <em>John the Baptist<\/em><em>,<\/em> who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:33-35<\/strong> Jesus’ second witness was <em>John the Baptist<\/em><em>,<\/em> who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:33-35 Jesus’ second witness was John the Baptist, who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).","summary_en":"5:33-35 Jesus’ second witness was John the Baptist, who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111670,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:33","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:33-35<\/strong> Jesus’ second witness was <em>John the Baptist<\/em><em>,<\/em> who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:33-35<\/strong> Jesus’ second witness was <em>John the Baptist<\/em><em>,<\/em> who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:33-35 Jesus’ second witness was John the Baptist, who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).","summary_en":"5:33-35 Jesus’ second witness was John the Baptist, who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139296,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:33","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:33-35<\/strong> Jesus’ second witness was <em>John the Baptist<\/em><em>,<\/em> who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:33-35<\/strong> Jesus’ second witness was <em>John the Baptist<\/em><em>,<\/em> who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:33-35 Jesus’ second witness was John the Baptist, who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).","summary_en":"5:33-35 Jesus’ second witness was John the Baptist, who pointed to Jesus as Messiah (1:29-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"36":[{"id":26013,"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":56419,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:36<\/strong> Jesus’ third witness, his <em>teachings<\/em> and <em>miracles<\/em><em>,<\/em> were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:36<\/strong> Jesus’ third witness, his <em>teachings<\/em> and <em>miracles<\/em><em>,<\/em> were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:36 Jesus’ third witness, his teachings and miracles, were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.","summary_en":"5:36 Jesus’ third witness, his teachings and miracles, were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84045,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:36<\/strong> Jesus’ third witness, his <em>teachings<\/em> and <em>miracles<\/em><em>,<\/em> were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:36<\/strong> Jesus’ third witness, his <em>teachings<\/em> and <em>miracles<\/em><em>,<\/em> were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:36 Jesus’ third witness, his teachings and miracles, were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.","summary_en":"5:36 Jesus’ third witness, his teachings and miracles, were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111671,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:36<\/strong> Jesus’ third witness, his <em>teachings<\/em> and <em>miracles<\/em><em>,<\/em> were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:36<\/strong> Jesus’ third witness, his <em>teachings<\/em> and <em>miracles<\/em><em>,<\/em> were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:36 Jesus’ third witness, his teachings and miracles, were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.","summary_en":"5:36 Jesus’ third witness, his teachings and miracles, were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139297,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:36<\/strong> Jesus’ third witness, his <em>teachings<\/em> and <em>miracles<\/em><em>,<\/em> were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:36<\/strong> Jesus’ third witness, his <em>teachings<\/em> and <em>miracles<\/em><em>,<\/em> were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:36 Jesus’ third witness, his teachings and miracles, were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.","summary_en":"5:36 Jesus’ third witness, his teachings and miracles, were signs that unveiled his true identity and pointed to the Father who sent him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"39":[{"id":25459,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Messiah","title_en":"Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","summary_en":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32914,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Revelation","title_en":"Revelation","content_ro":"<h3>REVELATION<\/h3>\n<p>Term from the Latin <em>revelatio,<\/em> referring to either (1) the act of revealing for the purpose of making something known or (2) the thing that is revealed. In theology it designates God’s own self-disclosure or manifesting of himself, or things concerning himself and the world; it may also mean the word itself, oral or written, that conveys such revelation. The equivalent NT terms are <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">apokalupsis<\/span> (apocalypse), which means unveiling, uncovering, or making someone or something known. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phanerosis<\/span> is virtually synonymous, though usually with the nuance of clear, readily discernible presentation.<\/p>\n<p>Rationalistic philosophy (as promoted by René Descartes, Immanuel Kant, J. G. Fichte, F. W. J. von Schelling, G. W. F. Hegel) finds in human reason the sole source for whatever shape revelation takes or is, acknowledging only natural religion and denying the reality of all supernatural divine revelation. Rationalists may at times admit the possibility of supernatural religion, but they cannot conceive of divine intervention.<\/p>\n<p>Christian theology, on the other hand, is committed to the idea that the principle of knowledge is the Word of God, specifically the Scripture, despite the severe critique of higher criticism against any claim that the Scripture affords a secure, reliable, and independent base for theological truth. Modern critical theology has declared its support for what it calls “scientific theology,” for the “sure” judgments of natural science and the supposed improbability of all supernatural happenings. This has forced the Scripture, as the inspired Word of God, out of its authoritative, normative position. What the Scripture contains is not the account of what actually happened, or what God actually said or did, but merely the early church’s confession of faith as to what first-century followers of Christ supposed or contrived to have happened. The Bible, therefore, is not unique in its divine origin; it is only the unique product of early religious searchings and strivings.<\/p>\n<p>Christian theology, on the other hand, asserts (on the basis of the scriptural text and the confirming mighty acts of God) that divine revelation is the first, last, and only source for theology. People have knowledge of God because of God’s initiative and activity. God is always the initiator and author of revelation; people are the recipients. God discloses what otherwise would be unknown; he uncovers what otherwise would be hidden (Dt 29:29; Gal 1:12; Eph 3:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GeneralRevelation\">General Revelation<\/p>\n<p>God draws back the veil in a twofold manner. There is first of all what has come to be called “general revelation.” God reveals himself in nature, in history, and in all people as made in his image. The association of God’s revelation with nature, by which people have an intuitive knowledge of God’s existence, is of long standing and is a truth supported throughout Scripture—both in the OT (Pss 10:11; 14:1, 19:1) and in the NT (Acts 14:17; 17:22-29; Rom 1:19-21). That there is a God, that God is the Creator with almighty power, that God deals justly as the supreme Judge, or rules as the “wholly other” over his creatures—these things are known and recognized by many people. Thus, the fact that God <em>is,<\/em> is undeniable. So, when people deny God’s existence, as do atheists, it is a forced effort against an inner conviction worked by nature itself. Paul could expect concurrence from the Athenians when he asserted that it is in God, the one and only true God, that all people live and move and have their being (Acts 17:28). Knowing God through nature, however, is not the end of revelation. Full and complete revelation comes when people encounter the personhood of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SpecialRevelation\">Special Revelation<\/p>\n<p>To know God from his revelation in nature still leaves him and his gracious purposes completely unknown. The gracious, loving heart of God intends the salvation of all people. By special revelation God purposes to share this with mankind in various ways. Mankind would know nothing at all of God’s messianic purposes in Christ, if God had not revealed his heart and purposes throughout Scripture. By inner, immediate illumination of their hearts and minds by God, the prophets and apostles spoke his Word as he gave them utterance (Jer 1:4-19; 1 Cor 2:13; 1 Thes 2:13; 2 Pt 1:16-21). The zenith of God’s revelation was the coming in flesh of his beloved Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 1:14-18; Gal 4:4-5; Heb 1:1-2). Jesus’ revelation of the Father and the Father’s gracious will toward all people was direct, accurate, and preeminent (Jn 14).<\/p>\n<p>God did not merely illuminate the hearts and minds of his prophets and apostles to speak his Word, but in specific instances also inspired them to record in writing the thoughts, words, and promises that he wanted revealed and retained for all time. The sacred collection of writings forms a remarkably harmonious and unified whole by which God reveals his thoughts and purposes toward humanity. For this writing, the prophets and apostles were prompted to recount not only certain historical events and happenings but also what God revealed for special communication. The ultimate purpose of Scripture is to reveal Christ. To him all Scripture gives witness (Jn 5:39; 10:35; Acts 10:43; 18:28; 1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible, Inspiration of the.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REVELATION<\/h3>\n<p>Term from the Latin <em>revelatio,<\/em> referring to either (1) the act of revealing for the purpose of making something known or (2) the thing that is revealed. In theology it designates God’s own self-disclosure or manifesting of himself, or things concerning himself and the world; it may also mean the word itself, oral or written, that conveys such revelation. The equivalent NT terms are <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">apokalupsis<\/span> (apocalypse), which means unveiling, uncovering, or making someone or something known. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phanerosis<\/span> is virtually synonymous, though usually with the nuance of clear, readily discernible presentation.<\/p>\n<p>Rationalistic philosophy (as promoted by René Descartes, Immanuel Kant, J. G. Fichte, F. W. J. von Schelling, G. W. F. Hegel) finds in human reason the sole source for whatever shape revelation takes or is, acknowledging only natural religion and denying the reality of all supernatural divine revelation. Rationalists may at times admit the possibility of supernatural religion, but they cannot conceive of divine intervention.<\/p>\n<p>Christian theology, on the other hand, is committed to the idea that the principle of knowledge is the Word of God, specifically the Scripture, despite the severe critique of higher criticism against any claim that the Scripture affords a secure, reliable, and independent base for theological truth. Modern critical theology has declared its support for what it calls “scientific theology,” for the “sure” judgments of natural science and the supposed improbability of all supernatural happenings. This has forced the Scripture, as the inspired Word of God, out of its authoritative, normative position. What the Scripture contains is not the account of what actually happened, or what God actually said or did, but merely the early church’s confession of faith as to what first-century followers of Christ supposed or contrived to have happened. The Bible, therefore, is not unique in its divine origin; it is only the unique product of early religious searchings and strivings.<\/p>\n<p>Christian theology, on the other hand, asserts (on the basis of the scriptural text and the confirming mighty acts of God) that divine revelation is the first, last, and only source for theology. People have knowledge of God because of God’s initiative and activity. God is always the initiator and author of revelation; people are the recipients. God discloses what otherwise would be unknown; he uncovers what otherwise would be hidden (Dt 29:29; Gal 1:12; Eph 3:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GeneralRevelation\">General Revelation<\/p>\n<p>God draws back the veil in a twofold manner. There is first of all what has come to be called “general revelation.” God reveals himself in nature, in history, and in all people as made in his image. The association of God’s revelation with nature, by which people have an intuitive knowledge of God’s existence, is of long standing and is a truth supported throughout Scripture—both in the OT (Pss 10:11; 14:1, 19:1) and in the NT (Acts 14:17; 17:22-29; Rom 1:19-21). That there is a God, that God is the Creator with almighty power, that God deals justly as the supreme Judge, or rules as the “wholly other” over his creatures—these things are known and recognized by many people. Thus, the fact that God <em>is,<\/em> is undeniable. So, when people deny God’s existence, as do atheists, it is a forced effort against an inner conviction worked by nature itself. Paul could expect concurrence from the Athenians when he asserted that it is in God, the one and only true God, that all people live and move and have their being (Acts 17:28). Knowing God through nature, however, is not the end of revelation. Full and complete revelation comes when people encounter the personhood of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SpecialRevelation\">Special Revelation<\/p>\n<p>To know God from his revelation in nature still leaves him and his gracious purposes completely unknown. The gracious, loving heart of God intends the salvation of all people. By special revelation God purposes to share this with mankind in various ways. Mankind would know nothing at all of God’s messianic purposes in Christ, if God had not revealed his heart and purposes throughout Scripture. By inner, immediate illumination of their hearts and minds by God, the prophets and apostles spoke his Word as he gave them utterance (Jer 1:4-19; 1 Cor 2:13; 1 Thes 2:13; 2 Pt 1:16-21). The zenith of God’s revelation was the coming in flesh of his beloved Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 1:14-18; Gal 4:4-5; Heb 1:1-2). Jesus’ revelation of the Father and the Father’s gracious will toward all people was direct, accurate, and preeminent (Jn 14).<\/p>\n<p>God did not merely illuminate the hearts and minds of his prophets and apostles to speak his Word, but in specific instances also inspired them to record in writing the thoughts, words, and promises that he wanted revealed and retained for all time. The sacred collection of writings forms a remarkably harmonious and unified whole by which God reveals his thoughts and purposes toward humanity. For this writing, the prophets and apostles were prompted to recount not only certain historical events and happenings but also what God revealed for special communication. The ultimate purpose of Scripture is to reveal Christ. To him all Scripture gives witness (Jn 5:39; 10:35; Acts 10:43; 18:28; 1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible, Inspiration of the.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REVELATION Term from the Latin revelatio, referring to either (1) the act of revealing for the purpose of making something known or (2) the thing that is revealed. In theology it designates God’s own self-disclosure or manifesting of himself, or things concerning himself and the world; it may also mean the word itself, oral or written, that conveys such revelation. The equivalent NT terms are apokalupsis (apocalypse), which means unveiling, uncovering, or making someone or something known. Th...","summary_en":"REVELATION Term from the Latin revelatio, referring to either (1) the act of revealing for the purpose of making something known or (2) the thing that is revealed. In theology it designates God’s own self-disclosure or manifesting of himself, or things concerning himself and the world; it may also mean the word itself, oral or written, that conveys such revelation. The equivalent NT terms are apokalupsis (apocalypse), which means unveiling, uncovering, or making someone or something known. Th...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38611,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Word, Word of God, Words of God","title_en":"Word, Word of God, Words of God","content_ro":"<h3>WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheImportanceofWords\">The Importance of Words<\/p>\n<p>In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, agreements, and records had little usefulness. Personal integrity and sincere speech were essential to communication and, for most people, to self-expression and stable relationships. The words of poets, prophets, storytellers, and instructors were carefully preserved.<\/p>\n<p>Words were diligently tested. Foolish words, flattery, deceit, words of enticement, lies, rumor, scandal, and blasphemous speech were all recognized as evil. The oath had to be inviolable in commercial, judicial, and civic affairs. The spoken blessing had power within itself and could not be withdrawn (Gn 27:30-38; Mt 10:12-13); so also the vow (Jgs 11:34-35) and the curse (Gn 27:12-13). Equally powerful was the word of command—of priestly, judicial, or royal authority (Eccl 8:4).<\/p>\n<p>This estimate of human words lingers in the NT. The word reveals the inner self, and so every careless, hurtful, deceitful word will be judged (Mt 12:34-37; 5:22), as will blasphemy (Lk 12:10). Paul (Eph 4:29; 5:4) and James (Jas 3:1-12) preserve this Hebrew reverence for the spoken word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordsofGod\">The Words of God<\/p>\n<p>God’s spoken word has been preserved in Scripture. His word came to and through the prophets (1 Kgs 12:22; 1 Chr 17:3; cf. Lk 3:2), who spoke and acted “by the word of the Lord.” His word also came in the law, which God “spoke” on Sinai (Ex 20:1); hence, “statutes,” “commandments,” and “precepts” are synonyms for God’s “word” (e.g., Ps 119).<\/p>\n<p>Periods when no such divine communication came constituted “famine” (1 Sm 3:1; Am 8:11). Mingled with warnings and injunctions were divine promises. All God’s words were dependable (Is 31:2), firmly fixed in heaven (Ps 119:89; Is 40:8), and backed up by divine oath (Jer 1:12; Ps 110:4; Ez 12:25, 28). A word, expressing the divine mind, was not threatening or burdensome; it was a delight, hope, joy, and protection against sin (Pss 1; 119; Jer 15:16). Men can live by it (Dt 8:3; Mt 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>God’s word has power to execute his will. It will not return to him “empty” but accomplish that which he purposes (Is 55:11). By his speech alone, God created the world, and his word upholds it (Gn 1; Ps 33:6; cf. Heb 1:2; 11:3; 2 Pt 3:5). Eventually, this divine revelation was put into writing, which makes the Bible also “the word of God” (Mk 7:13; cf. Lk 16:29-31; Jn 5:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus spoke the word of God. He was “mighty in word” (Lk 24:19); he taught with authority (Mk 1:22, 27), exercising power over the sea, disease, demons, and death (Mt 8:8, 13). His “word of the kingdom” is the living seed, which, planted in the good soil of receptive hearts, bears fruit for God (Mt 13:19; Mk 4:14). The word that Christ gives to his disciples cleanses them and frees them (Jn 8:31; 12:48; 15:3; 17:14). The word of faith the church preaches (Rom 10:8-9, 17) is variously described as the word of salvation, the word of grace, the word of reconciliation, the word of the gospel, the word of righteousness, and the word of life.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordofGod\">The Word of God<\/p>\n<p>Deliberately recalling Genesis 1, the Gospel writer, John, named the Son of God “the Word.” As the Word, the Son of God fully conveys and communicates God. The Greek term is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>;<\/em> it was used in two ways by the Greeks. The word might be thought of as remaining within a person, when it denoted his thought or reason. Or it might refer to the word going forth from a person, when it denoted the expression of his thought, i.e., speech. As a philosophical term, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> denoted the principle of the universe, even the creative energy that generated the universe. In both the Jewish conception and the Greek, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was associated with the idea of beginnings—the world began through the origination and instrumentality of the Word (Gn 1:3ff., where the expression “God said” is used again and again). John may have had these ideas in mind, but most likely he originated a new term to identify the Son of God as the divine expression in human form (Jn 1:14). He is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15), the express image of God’s substance (Heb 1:3). In the Godhead, the Son functions as the revealer of God and the reality of God, which is a central theme throughout John’s Gospel. John used a similar title in his first epistle: “the Word of life” (1 Jn 1:1-3). And in Revelation 19:11-16, Jesus is presented as the King of kings and Lord of lords, who has a name on him: “the Word of God.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible; John, Gospel of; Logos; Revelation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheImportanceofWords\">The Importance of Words<\/p>\n<p>In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, agreements, and records had little usefulness. Personal integrity and sincere speech were essential to communication and, for most people, to self-expression and stable relationships. The words of poets, prophets, storytellers, and instructors were carefully preserved.<\/p>\n<p>Words were diligently tested. Foolish words, flattery, deceit, words of enticement, lies, rumor, scandal, and blasphemous speech were all recognized as evil. The oath had to be inviolable in commercial, judicial, and civic affairs. The spoken blessing had power within itself and could not be withdrawn (Gn 27:30-38; Mt 10:12-13); so also the vow (Jgs 11:34-35) and the curse (Gn 27:12-13). Equally powerful was the word of command—of priestly, judicial, or royal authority (Eccl 8:4).<\/p>\n<p>This estimate of human words lingers in the NT. The word reveals the inner self, and so every careless, hurtful, deceitful word will be judged (Mt 12:34-37; 5:22), as will blasphemy (Lk 12:10). Paul (Eph 4:29; 5:4) and James (Jas 3:1-12) preserve this Hebrew reverence for the spoken word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordsofGod\">The Words of God<\/p>\n<p>God’s spoken word has been preserved in Scripture. His word came to and through the prophets (1 Kgs 12:22; 1 Chr 17:3; cf. Lk 3:2), who spoke and acted “by the word of the Lord.” His word also came in the law, which God “spoke” on Sinai (Ex 20:1); hence, “statutes,” “commandments,” and “precepts” are synonyms for God’s “word” (e.g., Ps 119).<\/p>\n<p>Periods when no such divine communication came constituted “famine” (1 Sm 3:1; Am 8:11). Mingled with warnings and injunctions were divine promises. All God’s words were dependable (Is 31:2), firmly fixed in heaven (Ps 119:89; Is 40:8), and backed up by divine oath (Jer 1:12; Ps 110:4; Ez 12:25, 28). A word, expressing the divine mind, was not threatening or burdensome; it was a delight, hope, joy, and protection against sin (Pss 1; 119; Jer 15:16). Men can live by it (Dt 8:3; Mt 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>God’s word has power to execute his will. It will not return to him “empty” but accomplish that which he purposes (Is 55:11). By his speech alone, God created the world, and his word upholds it (Gn 1; Ps 33:6; cf. Heb 1:2; 11:3; 2 Pt 3:5). Eventually, this divine revelation was put into writing, which makes the Bible also “the word of God” (Mk 7:13; cf. Lk 16:29-31; Jn 5:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus spoke the word of God. He was “mighty in word” (Lk 24:19); he taught with authority (Mk 1:22, 27), exercising power over the sea, disease, demons, and death (Mt 8:8, 13). His “word of the kingdom” is the living seed, which, planted in the good soil of receptive hearts, bears fruit for God (Mt 13:19; Mk 4:14). The word that Christ gives to his disciples cleanses them and frees them (Jn 8:31; 12:48; 15:3; 17:14). The word of faith the church preaches (Rom 10:8-9, 17) is variously described as the word of salvation, the word of grace, the word of reconciliation, the word of the gospel, the word of righteousness, and the word of life.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordofGod\">The Word of God<\/p>\n<p>Deliberately recalling Genesis 1, the Gospel writer, John, named the Son of God “the Word.” As the Word, the Son of God fully conveys and communicates God. The Greek term is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>;<\/em> it was used in two ways by the Greeks. The word might be thought of as remaining within a person, when it denoted his thought or reason. Or it might refer to the word going forth from a person, when it denoted the expression of his thought, i.e., speech. As a philosophical term, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> denoted the principle of the universe, even the creative energy that generated the universe. In both the Jewish conception and the Greek, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was associated with the idea of beginnings—the world began through the origination and instrumentality of the Word (Gn 1:3ff., where the expression “God said” is used again and again). John may have had these ideas in mind, but most likely he originated a new term to identify the Son of God as the divine expression in human form (Jn 1:14). He is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15), the express image of God’s substance (Heb 1:3). In the Godhead, the Son functions as the revealer of God and the reality of God, which is a central theme throughout John’s Gospel. John used a similar title in his first epistle: “the Word of life” (1 Jn 1:1-3). And in Revelation 19:11-16, Jesus is presented as the King of kings and Lord of lords, who has a name on him: “the Word of God.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible; John, Gospel of; Logos; Revelation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son. The Importance of Words In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, ag...","summary_en":"WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son. The Importance of Words In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, ag...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56420,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:39","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:39","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:39-40<\/strong> Jesus’ fourth witness was <em>the Scriptures<\/em>. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:39-40<\/strong> Jesus’ fourth witness was <em>the Scriptures<\/em>. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:39-40 Jesus’ fourth witness was the Scriptures. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).","summary_en":"5:39-40 Jesus’ fourth witness was the Scriptures. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84046,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:39","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:39","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:39-40<\/strong> Jesus’ fourth witness was <em>the Scriptures<\/em>. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:39-40<\/strong> Jesus’ fourth witness was <em>the Scriptures<\/em>. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:39-40 Jesus’ fourth witness was the Scriptures. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).","summary_en":"5:39-40 Jesus’ fourth witness was the Scriptures. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111672,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:39","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:39","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:39-40<\/strong> Jesus’ fourth witness was <em>the Scriptures<\/em>. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:39-40<\/strong> Jesus’ fourth witness was <em>the Scriptures<\/em>. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:39-40 Jesus’ fourth witness was the Scriptures. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).","summary_en":"5:39-40 Jesus’ fourth witness was the Scriptures. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139298,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:39","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:39","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:39-40<\/strong> Jesus’ fourth witness was <em>the Scriptures<\/em>. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:39-40<\/strong> Jesus’ fourth witness was <em>the Scriptures<\/em>. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:39-40 Jesus’ fourth witness was the Scriptures. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).","summary_en":"5:39-40 Jesus’ fourth witness was the Scriptures. The Old Testament pointed to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled its prophecies (see Luke 24:25-27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"40":[{"id":23246,"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}],"41":[{"id":56421,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:41","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:41","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:41-47<\/strong> Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:41-47<\/strong> Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:41-47 Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.","summary_en":"5:41-47 Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84047,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:41","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:41","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:41-47<\/strong> Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:41-47<\/strong> Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:41-47 Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.","summary_en":"5:41-47 Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111673,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:41","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:41","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:41-47<\/strong> Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:41-47<\/strong> Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:41-47 Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.","summary_en":"5:41-47 Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139299,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:41","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:41","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:41-47<\/strong> Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:41-47<\/strong> Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:41-47 Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.","summary_en":"5:41-47 Jewish trials sought to discover the truth. Falsely accused defendants could not only prove their innocence but also prosecute their accusers, which Jesus did here.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"42":[{"id":56422,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:42","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:42","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:42<\/strong> Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not <em>have God’s love within<\/em> them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:42<\/strong> Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not <em>have God’s love within<\/em> them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:42 Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not have God’s love within them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.","summary_en":"5:42 Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not have God’s love within them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84048,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:42","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:42","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:42<\/strong> Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not <em>have God’s love within<\/em> them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:42<\/strong> Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not <em>have God’s love within<\/em> them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:42 Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not have God’s love within them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.","summary_en":"5:42 Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not have God’s love within them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111674,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:42","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:42","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:42<\/strong> Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not <em>have God’s love within<\/em> them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:42<\/strong> Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not <em>have God’s love within<\/em> them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:42 Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not have God’s love within them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.","summary_en":"5:42 Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not have God’s love within them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139300,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:42","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:42","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:42<\/strong> Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not <em>have God’s love within<\/em> them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:42<\/strong> Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not <em>have God’s love within<\/em> them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:42 Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not have God’s love within them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.","summary_en":"5:42 Jesus charged that the Jewish leaders did not have God’s love within them. Without God’s love, it was impossible for them to understand the things he was doing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"44":[{"id":56423,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:44","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:44","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:44<\/strong> The Jewish leaders pursued <em>honor<\/em> and prestige from <em>each other<\/em>. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:44<\/strong> The Jewish leaders pursued <em>honor<\/em> and prestige from <em>each other<\/em>. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:44 The Jewish leaders pursued honor and prestige from each other. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).","summary_en":"5:44 The Jewish leaders pursued honor and prestige from each other. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84049,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:44","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:44","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:44<\/strong> The Jewish leaders pursued <em>honor<\/em> and prestige from <em>each other<\/em>. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:44<\/strong> The Jewish leaders pursued <em>honor<\/em> and prestige from <em>each other<\/em>. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:44 The Jewish leaders pursued honor and prestige from each other. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).","summary_en":"5:44 The Jewish leaders pursued honor and prestige from each other. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111675,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:44","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:44","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:44<\/strong> The Jewish leaders pursued <em>honor<\/em> and prestige from <em>each other<\/em>. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:44<\/strong> The Jewish leaders pursued <em>honor<\/em> and prestige from <em>each other<\/em>. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:44 The Jewish leaders pursued honor and prestige from each other. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).","summary_en":"5:44 The Jewish leaders pursued honor and prestige from each other. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139301,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:44","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:44","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:44<\/strong> The Jewish leaders pursued <em>honor<\/em> and prestige from <em>each other<\/em>. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:44<\/strong> The Jewish leaders pursued <em>honor<\/em> and prestige from <em>each other<\/em>. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:44 The Jewish leaders pursued honor and prestige from each other. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).","summary_en":"5:44 The Jewish leaders pursued honor and prestige from each other. They loved religious life, but they had forgotten to love God. This hypocrisy made them liable to judgment (5:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"45":[{"id":56424,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:45","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:45","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ fifth and final witness was <em>Moses<\/em><em>,<\/em> the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ fifth and final witness was <em>Moses<\/em><em>,<\/em> the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:45-46 Jesus’ fifth and final witness was Moses, the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).","summary_en":"5:45-46 Jesus’ fifth and final witness was Moses, the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84050,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:45","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:45","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ fifth and final witness was <em>Moses<\/em><em>,<\/em> the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ fifth and final witness was <em>Moses<\/em><em>,<\/em> the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:45-46 Jesus’ fifth and final witness was Moses, the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).","summary_en":"5:45-46 Jesus’ fifth and final witness was Moses, the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111676,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:45","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:45","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ fifth and final witness was <em>Moses<\/em><em>,<\/em> the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ fifth and final witness was <em>Moses<\/em><em>,<\/em> the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:45-46 Jesus’ fifth and final witness was Moses, the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).","summary_en":"5:45-46 Jesus’ fifth and final witness was Moses, the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139302,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 5:45","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 5:45","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ fifth and final witness was <em>Moses<\/em><em>,<\/em> the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>5:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ fifth and final witness was <em>Moses<\/em><em>,<\/em> the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:45-46 Jesus’ fifth and final witness was Moses, the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).","summary_en":"5:45-46 Jesus’ fifth and final witness was Moses, the founding father of Judaism. John had already compared Jesus with Moses (1:17; see also 6:14-15). The Jewish leaders were ignoring Moses’ clear words about the Messiah (e.g., Deut 18:15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61847,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Judgment of His People","title_en":"God’s Judgment of His People","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Judgment of His People<\/h3>\n<p>Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes during this period, God’s people are portrayed positively. The people of Judah rejoiced over the removal of Athaliah and the installation of Joash as king (11:12, 18-20). At times, the people were instrumental in the succession of kings (14:21; 23:30) or were responsive to godly leadership (11:17; 18:36; 23:1-3, 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite God’s repeated warnings through his prophets (17:13), the people of both kingdoms became set in their apostasy (17:14-19, 22). So God’s righteous wrath burned against them and their leaders, and he brought his threatened judgment upon them (17:22-23; 21:10-15; 22:17; 23:26-27; 24:20; 25:21). God acted in accordance with the stipulations in his covenant with them (Lev 26:27-39), even though he loved his people and longed to restore them (see Hos 11:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God never gave up caring for his people. He rescued them from Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:17–19:37) and promised that a remnant would again thrive in the land (19:30-31). Even the good treatment Jehoiachin received in Babylon (25:27-30) no doubt renewed hope among the repentant of God’s people. God promised to one day restore his people from exile and give them fellowship with him in the land once again, ruling over them through his chosen king, the descendant of David (Jer 23:3-6; see also Isa 11; Rom 11:5-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 26:27-39; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; 21:9-16; 23:26-27; 24:20–25:21; Ps 62:12; Prov 11:31; Isa 3:10-11; Jer 1:16; 17:10; 23:3-6; Ezek 7:1-9; 33:18-20; 34:17-24; 39:23-24; Hos 11:1-11; Amos 3:2; Matt 25:24-30; Luke 12:47-48; 13:6-9; John 5:45-47; Rom 11:5-36; Col 3:23-25; Heb 12:25; Jas 2:12-13; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 2:1–3:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Judgment of His People<\/h3>\n<p>Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes during this period, God’s people are portrayed positively. The people of Judah rejoiced over the removal of Athaliah and the installation of Joash as king (11:12, 18-20). At times, the people were instrumental in the succession of kings (14:21; 23:30) or were responsive to godly leadership (11:17; 18:36; 23:1-3, 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite God’s repeated warnings through his prophets (17:13), the people of both kingdoms became set in their apostasy (17:14-19, 22). So God’s righteous wrath burned against them and their leaders, and he brought his threatened judgment upon them (17:22-23; 21:10-15; 22:17; 23:26-27; 24:20; 25:21). God acted in accordance with the stipulations in his covenant with them (Lev 26:27-39), even though he loved his people and longed to restore them (see Hos 11:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God never gave up caring for his people. He rescued them from Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:17–19:37) and promised that a remnant would again thrive in the land (19:30-31). Even the good treatment Jehoiachin received in Babylon (25:27-30) no doubt renewed hope among the repentant of God’s people. God promised to one day restore his people from exile and give them fellowship with him in the land once again, ruling over them through his chosen king, the descendant of David (Jer 23:3-6; see also Isa 11; Rom 11:5-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 26:27-39; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; 21:9-16; 23:26-27; 24:20–25:21; Ps 62:12; Prov 11:31; Isa 3:10-11; Jer 1:16; 17:10; 23:3-6; Ezek 7:1-9; 33:18-20; 34:17-24; 39:23-24; Hos 11:1-11; Amos 3:2; Matt 25:24-30; Luke 12:47-48; 13:6-9; John 5:45-47; Rom 11:5-36; Col 3:23-25; Heb 12:25; Jas 2:12-13; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 2:1–3:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Judgment of His People Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4). Sometimes during this p...","summary_en":"God’s Judgment of His People Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4). Sometimes during this p...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89473,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Judgment of His People","title_en":"God’s Judgment of His People","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Judgment of His People<\/h3>\n<p>Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes during this period, God’s people are portrayed positively. The people of Judah rejoiced over the removal of Athaliah and the installation of Joash as king (11:12, 18-20). At times, the people were instrumental in the succession of kings (14:21; 23:30) or were responsive to godly leadership (11:17; 18:36; 23:1-3, 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite God’s repeated warnings through his prophets (17:13), the people of both kingdoms became set in their apostasy (17:14-19, 22). So God’s righteous wrath burned against them and their leaders, and he brought his threatened judgment upon them (17:22-23; 21:10-15; 22:17; 23:26-27; 24:20; 25:21). God acted in accordance with the stipulations in his covenant with them (Lev 26:27-39), even though he loved his people and longed to restore them (see Hos 11:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God never gave up caring for his people. He rescued them from Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:17–19:37) and promised that a remnant would again thrive in the land (19:30-31). Even the good treatment Jehoiachin received in Babylon (25:27-30) no doubt renewed hope among the repentant of God’s people. God promised to one day restore his people from exile and give them fellowship with him in the land once again, ruling over them through his chosen king, the descendant of David (Jer 23:3-6; see also Isa 11; Rom 11:5-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 26:27-39; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; 21:9-16; 23:26-27; 24:20–25:21; Ps 62:12; Prov 11:31; Isa 3:10-11; Jer 1:16; 17:10; 23:3-6; Ezek 7:1-9; 33:18-20; 34:17-24; 39:23-24; Hos 11:1-11; Amos 3:2; Matt 25:24-30; Luke 12:47-48; 13:6-9; John 5:45-47; Rom 11:5-36; Col 3:23-25; Heb 12:25; Jas 2:12-13; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 2:1–3:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Judgment of His People<\/h3>\n<p>Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes during this period, God’s people are portrayed positively. The people of Judah rejoiced over the removal of Athaliah and the installation of Joash as king (11:12, 18-20). At times, the people were instrumental in the succession of kings (14:21; 23:30) or were responsive to godly leadership (11:17; 18:36; 23:1-3, 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite God’s repeated warnings through his prophets (17:13), the people of both kingdoms became set in their apostasy (17:14-19, 22). So God’s righteous wrath burned against them and their leaders, and he brought his threatened judgment upon them (17:22-23; 21:10-15; 22:17; 23:26-27; 24:20; 25:21). God acted in accordance with the stipulations in his covenant with them (Lev 26:27-39), even though he loved his people and longed to restore them (see Hos 11:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God never gave up caring for his people. He rescued them from Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:17–19:37) and promised that a remnant would again thrive in the land (19:30-31). Even the good treatment Jehoiachin received in Babylon (25:27-30) no doubt renewed hope among the repentant of God’s people. God promised to one day restore his people from exile and give them fellowship with him in the land once again, ruling over them through his chosen king, the descendant of David (Jer 23:3-6; see also Isa 11; Rom 11:5-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 26:27-39; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; 21:9-16; 23:26-27; 24:20–25:21; Ps 62:12; Prov 11:31; Isa 3:10-11; Jer 1:16; 17:10; 23:3-6; Ezek 7:1-9; 33:18-20; 34:17-24; 39:23-24; Hos 11:1-11; Amos 3:2; Matt 25:24-30; Luke 12:47-48; 13:6-9; John 5:45-47; Rom 11:5-36; Col 3:23-25; Heb 12:25; Jas 2:12-13; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 2:1–3:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Judgment of His People Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4). Sometimes during this p...","summary_en":"God’s Judgment of His People Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4). Sometimes during this p...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117099,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Judgment of His People","title_en":"God’s Judgment of His People","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Judgment of His People<\/h3>\n<p>Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes during this period, God’s people are portrayed positively. The people of Judah rejoiced over the removal of Athaliah and the installation of Joash as king (11:12, 18-20). At times, the people were instrumental in the succession of kings (14:21; 23:30) or were responsive to godly leadership (11:17; 18:36; 23:1-3, 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite God’s repeated warnings through his prophets (17:13), the people of both kingdoms became set in their apostasy (17:14-19, 22). So God’s righteous wrath burned against them and their leaders, and he brought his threatened judgment upon them (17:22-23; 21:10-15; 22:17; 23:26-27; 24:20; 25:21). God acted in accordance with the stipulations in his covenant with them (Lev 26:27-39), even though he loved his people and longed to restore them (see Hos 11:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God never gave up caring for his people. He rescued them from Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:17–19:37) and promised that a remnant would again thrive in the land (19:30-31). Even the good treatment Jehoiachin received in Babylon (25:27-30) no doubt renewed hope among the repentant of God’s people. God promised to one day restore his people from exile and give them fellowship with him in the land once again, ruling over them through his chosen king, the descendant of David (Jer 23:3-6; see also Isa 11; Rom 11:5-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 26:27-39; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; 21:9-16; 23:26-27; 24:20–25:21; Ps 62:12; Prov 11:31; Isa 3:10-11; Jer 1:16; 17:10; 23:3-6; Ezek 7:1-9; 33:18-20; 34:17-24; 39:23-24; Hos 11:1-11; Amos 3:2; Matt 25:24-30; Luke 12:47-48; 13:6-9; John 5:45-47; Rom 11:5-36; Col 3:23-25; Heb 12:25; Jas 2:12-13; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 2:1–3:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Judgment of His People<\/h3>\n<p>Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes during this period, God’s people are portrayed positively. The people of Judah rejoiced over the removal of Athaliah and the installation of Joash as king (11:12, 18-20). At times, the people were instrumental in the succession of kings (14:21; 23:30) or were responsive to godly leadership (11:17; 18:36; 23:1-3, 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite God’s repeated warnings through his prophets (17:13), the people of both kingdoms became set in their apostasy (17:14-19, 22). So God’s righteous wrath burned against them and their leaders, and he brought his threatened judgment upon them (17:22-23; 21:10-15; 22:17; 23:26-27; 24:20; 25:21). God acted in accordance with the stipulations in his covenant with them (Lev 26:27-39), even though he loved his people and longed to restore them (see Hos 11:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God never gave up caring for his people. He rescued them from Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:17–19:37) and promised that a remnant would again thrive in the land (19:30-31). Even the good treatment Jehoiachin received in Babylon (25:27-30) no doubt renewed hope among the repentant of God’s people. God promised to one day restore his people from exile and give them fellowship with him in the land once again, ruling over them through his chosen king, the descendant of David (Jer 23:3-6; see also Isa 11; Rom 11:5-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 26:27-39; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; 21:9-16; 23:26-27; 24:20–25:21; Ps 62:12; Prov 11:31; Isa 3:10-11; Jer 1:16; 17:10; 23:3-6; Ezek 7:1-9; 33:18-20; 34:17-24; 39:23-24; Hos 11:1-11; Amos 3:2; Matt 25:24-30; Luke 12:47-48; 13:6-9; John 5:45-47; Rom 11:5-36; Col 3:23-25; Heb 12:25; Jas 2:12-13; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 2:1–3:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Judgment of His People Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4). Sometimes during this p...","summary_en":"God’s Judgment of His People Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4). Sometimes during this p...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144725,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Judgment of His People","title_en":"God’s Judgment of His People","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Judgment of His People<\/h3>\n<p>Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes during this period, God’s people are portrayed positively. The people of Judah rejoiced over the removal of Athaliah and the installation of Joash as king (11:12, 18-20). At times, the people were instrumental in the succession of kings (14:21; 23:30) or were responsive to godly leadership (11:17; 18:36; 23:1-3, 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite God’s repeated warnings through his prophets (17:13), the people of both kingdoms became set in their apostasy (17:14-19, 22). So God’s righteous wrath burned against them and their leaders, and he brought his threatened judgment upon them (17:22-23; 21:10-15; 22:17; 23:26-27; 24:20; 25:21). God acted in accordance with the stipulations in his covenant with them (Lev 26:27-39), even though he loved his people and longed to restore them (see Hos 11:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God never gave up caring for his people. He rescued them from Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:17–19:37) and promised that a remnant would again thrive in the land (19:30-31). Even the good treatment Jehoiachin received in Babylon (25:27-30) no doubt renewed hope among the repentant of God’s people. God promised to one day restore his people from exile and give them fellowship with him in the land once again, ruling over them through his chosen king, the descendant of David (Jer 23:3-6; see also Isa 11; Rom 11:5-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 26:27-39; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; 21:9-16; 23:26-27; 24:20–25:21; Ps 62:12; Prov 11:31; Isa 3:10-11; Jer 1:16; 17:10; 23:3-6; Ezek 7:1-9; 33:18-20; 34:17-24; 39:23-24; Hos 11:1-11; Amos 3:2; Matt 25:24-30; Luke 12:47-48; 13:6-9; John 5:45-47; Rom 11:5-36; Col 3:23-25; Heb 12:25; Jas 2:12-13; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 2:1–3:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Judgment of His People<\/h3>\n<p>Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes during this period, God’s people are portrayed positively. The people of Judah rejoiced over the removal of Athaliah and the installation of Joash as king (11:12, 18-20). At times, the people were instrumental in the succession of kings (14:21; 23:30) or were responsive to godly leadership (11:17; 18:36; 23:1-3, 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite God’s repeated warnings through his prophets (17:13), the people of both kingdoms became set in their apostasy (17:14-19, 22). So God’s righteous wrath burned against them and their leaders, and he brought his threatened judgment upon them (17:22-23; 21:10-15; 22:17; 23:26-27; 24:20; 25:21). God acted in accordance with the stipulations in his covenant with them (Lev 26:27-39), even though he loved his people and longed to restore them (see Hos 11:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God never gave up caring for his people. He rescued them from Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:17–19:37) and promised that a remnant would again thrive in the land (19:30-31). Even the good treatment Jehoiachin received in Babylon (25:27-30) no doubt renewed hope among the repentant of God’s people. God promised to one day restore his people from exile and give them fellowship with him in the land once again, ruling over them through his chosen king, the descendant of David (Jer 23:3-6; see also Isa 11; Rom 11:5-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 26:27-39; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; 21:9-16; 23:26-27; 24:20–25:21; Ps 62:12; Prov 11:31; Isa 3:10-11; Jer 1:16; 17:10; 23:3-6; Ezek 7:1-9; 33:18-20; 34:17-24; 39:23-24; Hos 11:1-11; Amos 3:2; Matt 25:24-30; Luke 12:47-48; 13:6-9; John 5:45-47; Rom 11:5-36; Col 3:23-25; Heb 12:25; Jas 2:12-13; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 2:1–3:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Judgment of His People Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4). Sometimes during this p...","summary_en":"God’s Judgment of His People Although the kings of Israel and Judah had a major role in the history of the divided kingdom, the people also played a part in what occurred. As they followed their wicked rulers (2 Kgs 3:3; 17:22; 21:9, 11, 16), their own hearts strayed from God (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 17:9-11; 18:4; 22:17). They participated in the religious practices initiated by Jeroboam I (10:28-31; 17:21-22) and worshiped at pagan shrines (12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 18:4). Sometimes during this p...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"46":[{"id":11834,"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":25445,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Messiah","title_en":"Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","summary_en":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27756,"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":64326,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Written Word","title_en":"The Written Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Written Word<\/h3>\n<p>When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah?<\/p>\n<p>As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast effectively in writing. The Lord told Jeremiah to write down all the messages he had ever delivered (Jer 36). Jeremiah had a helper, Baruch, who was skilled in writing and making as many copies as were needed. While Jeremiah and Baruch were in hiding, they purchased a scroll (a roll of papyrus) and prepared it so as to record the written messages. When the writing was finished, the scroll was read in the Temple courtyard and in the presence of King Jehoiakim. The king cut up the scroll and burned it, but Jeremiah had the messages rewritten on a new scroll, adding new material. Throughout the remainder of Jeremiah’s ministry, he had his messages written on papyrus and sent to the leaders of various countries, as well as to the exiles in Babylon (see Jer 29).<\/p>\n<p>The earliest example of writing the word of God appears in Exodus, where Moses was commanded to write down the words of the covenant (Exod 24:4, but see also Exod 17:14). It is specifically stated that Moses wrote the book of Deuteronomy (Deut 31:9, 24). The existence of the written book of the Law probably stimulated a tradition of writing down certain elements of what God was revealing (Josh 24:26; 1 Sam 10:25; 1 Chr 29:29; 2 Chr 9:29; Isa 8:16-17; 30:8). Many of Israel’s historical writings are said to have been kept by prophets (see 2 Chr 12:15; 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>These written documents, especially those written on leather scrolls, were kept in communities for a long time, and many copies were made from one document. These copies were so valuable that they were carefully preserved for centuries. The copies were also translated into any number of languages. The book of Jeremiah and the writings of other prophets, wise men, and teachers have been preserved, collected, and handed down to us as the Old and New Testaments, giving us a written record of God’s messages to his people (see 2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Pet 1:20-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:14; 31:18; 34:27-28; Deut 31:9-13; Isa 30:8; Jer 30:2-3; Jer 36:1-32; 45:1; 51:60-64; Ezek 43:11; Dan 7:1; Luke 1:1-4; John 5:46-47; 20:30-31; 21:24-25; Acts 1:1-2; Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11; 2 Tim 3:16-17; Phlm 1:21; Heb 13:22; 1 Pet 5:12; 2 Pet 1:20-21; 1 Jn 1:4; 2:12-24; 5:13; Rev 1:11; 10:4; 21:5; 22:18-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Written Word<\/h3>\n<p>When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah?<\/p>\n<p>As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast effectively in writing. The Lord told Jeremiah to write down all the messages he had ever delivered (Jer 36). Jeremiah had a helper, Baruch, who was skilled in writing and making as many copies as were needed. While Jeremiah and Baruch were in hiding, they purchased a scroll (a roll of papyrus) and prepared it so as to record the written messages. When the writing was finished, the scroll was read in the Temple courtyard and in the presence of King Jehoiakim. The king cut up the scroll and burned it, but Jeremiah had the messages rewritten on a new scroll, adding new material. Throughout the remainder of Jeremiah’s ministry, he had his messages written on papyrus and sent to the leaders of various countries, as well as to the exiles in Babylon (see Jer 29).<\/p>\n<p>The earliest example of writing the word of God appears in Exodus, where Moses was commanded to write down the words of the covenant (Exod 24:4, but see also Exod 17:14). It is specifically stated that Moses wrote the book of Deuteronomy (Deut 31:9, 24). The existence of the written book of the Law probably stimulated a tradition of writing down certain elements of what God was revealing (Josh 24:26; 1 Sam 10:25; 1 Chr 29:29; 2 Chr 9:29; Isa 8:16-17; 30:8). Many of Israel’s historical writings are said to have been kept by prophets (see 2 Chr 12:15; 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>These written documents, especially those written on leather scrolls, were kept in communities for a long time, and many copies were made from one document. These copies were so valuable that they were carefully preserved for centuries. The copies were also translated into any number of languages. The book of Jeremiah and the writings of other prophets, wise men, and teachers have been preserved, collected, and handed down to us as the Old and New Testaments, giving us a written record of God’s messages to his people (see 2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Pet 1:20-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:14; 31:18; 34:27-28; Deut 31:9-13; Isa 30:8; Jer 30:2-3; Jer 36:1-32; 45:1; 51:60-64; Ezek 43:11; Dan 7:1; Luke 1:1-4; John 5:46-47; 20:30-31; 21:24-25; Acts 1:1-2; Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11; 2 Tim 3:16-17; Phlm 1:21; Heb 13:22; 1 Pet 5:12; 2 Pet 1:20-21; 1 Jn 1:4; 2:12-24; 5:13; Rev 1:11; 10:4; 21:5; 22:18-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Written Word When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah? As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast eff...","summary_en":"The Written Word When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah? As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast eff...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91952,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Written Word","title_en":"The Written Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Written Word<\/h3>\n<p>When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah?<\/p>\n<p>As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast effectively in writing. The Lord told Jeremiah to write down all the messages he had ever delivered (Jer 36). Jeremiah had a helper, Baruch, who was skilled in writing and making as many copies as were needed. While Jeremiah and Baruch were in hiding, they purchased a scroll (a roll of papyrus) and prepared it so as to record the written messages. When the writing was finished, the scroll was read in the Temple courtyard and in the presence of King Jehoiakim. The king cut up the scroll and burned it, but Jeremiah had the messages rewritten on a new scroll, adding new material. Throughout the remainder of Jeremiah’s ministry, he had his messages written on papyrus and sent to the leaders of various countries, as well as to the exiles in Babylon (see Jer 29).<\/p>\n<p>The earliest example of writing the word of God appears in Exodus, where Moses was commanded to write down the words of the covenant (Exod 24:4, but see also Exod 17:14). It is specifically stated that Moses wrote the book of Deuteronomy (Deut 31:9, 24). The existence of the written book of the Law probably stimulated a tradition of writing down certain elements of what God was revealing (Josh 24:26; 1 Sam 10:25; 1 Chr 29:29; 2 Chr 9:29; Isa 8:16-17; 30:8). Many of Israel’s historical writings are said to have been kept by prophets (see 2 Chr 12:15; 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>These written documents, especially those written on leather scrolls, were kept in communities for a long time, and many copies were made from one document. These copies were so valuable that they were carefully preserved for centuries. The copies were also translated into any number of languages. The book of Jeremiah and the writings of other prophets, wise men, and teachers have been preserved, collected, and handed down to us as the Old and New Testaments, giving us a written record of God’s messages to his people (see 2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Pet 1:20-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:14; 31:18; 34:27-28; Deut 31:9-13; Isa 30:8; Jer 30:2-3; Jer 36:1-32; 45:1; 51:60-64; Ezek 43:11; Dan 7:1; Luke 1:1-4; John 5:46-47; 20:30-31; 21:24-25; Acts 1:1-2; Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11; 2 Tim 3:16-17; Phlm 1:21; Heb 13:22; 1 Pet 5:12; 2 Pet 1:20-21; 1 Jn 1:4; 2:12-24; 5:13; Rev 1:11; 10:4; 21:5; 22:18-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Written Word<\/h3>\n<p>When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah?<\/p>\n<p>As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast effectively in writing. The Lord told Jeremiah to write down all the messages he had ever delivered (Jer 36). Jeremiah had a helper, Baruch, who was skilled in writing and making as many copies as were needed. While Jeremiah and Baruch were in hiding, they purchased a scroll (a roll of papyrus) and prepared it so as to record the written messages. When the writing was finished, the scroll was read in the Temple courtyard and in the presence of King Jehoiakim. The king cut up the scroll and burned it, but Jeremiah had the messages rewritten on a new scroll, adding new material. Throughout the remainder of Jeremiah’s ministry, he had his messages written on papyrus and sent to the leaders of various countries, as well as to the exiles in Babylon (see Jer 29).<\/p>\n<p>The earliest example of writing the word of God appears in Exodus, where Moses was commanded to write down the words of the covenant (Exod 24:4, but see also Exod 17:14). It is specifically stated that Moses wrote the book of Deuteronomy (Deut 31:9, 24). The existence of the written book of the Law probably stimulated a tradition of writing down certain elements of what God was revealing (Josh 24:26; 1 Sam 10:25; 1 Chr 29:29; 2 Chr 9:29; Isa 8:16-17; 30:8). Many of Israel’s historical writings are said to have been kept by prophets (see 2 Chr 12:15; 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>These written documents, especially those written on leather scrolls, were kept in communities for a long time, and many copies were made from one document. These copies were so valuable that they were carefully preserved for centuries. The copies were also translated into any number of languages. The book of Jeremiah and the writings of other prophets, wise men, and teachers have been preserved, collected, and handed down to us as the Old and New Testaments, giving us a written record of God’s messages to his people (see 2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Pet 1:20-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:14; 31:18; 34:27-28; Deut 31:9-13; Isa 30:8; Jer 30:2-3; Jer 36:1-32; 45:1; 51:60-64; Ezek 43:11; Dan 7:1; Luke 1:1-4; John 5:46-47; 20:30-31; 21:24-25; Acts 1:1-2; Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11; 2 Tim 3:16-17; Phlm 1:21; Heb 13:22; 1 Pet 5:12; 2 Pet 1:20-21; 1 Jn 1:4; 2:12-24; 5:13; Rev 1:11; 10:4; 21:5; 22:18-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Written Word When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah? As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast eff...","summary_en":"The Written Word When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah? As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast eff...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119578,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Written Word","title_en":"The Written Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Written Word<\/h3>\n<p>When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah?<\/p>\n<p>As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast effectively in writing. The Lord told Jeremiah to write down all the messages he had ever delivered (Jer 36). Jeremiah had a helper, Baruch, who was skilled in writing and making as many copies as were needed. While Jeremiah and Baruch were in hiding, they purchased a scroll (a roll of papyrus) and prepared it so as to record the written messages. When the writing was finished, the scroll was read in the Temple courtyard and in the presence of King Jehoiakim. The king cut up the scroll and burned it, but Jeremiah had the messages rewritten on a new scroll, adding new material. Throughout the remainder of Jeremiah’s ministry, he had his messages written on papyrus and sent to the leaders of various countries, as well as to the exiles in Babylon (see Jer 29).<\/p>\n<p>The earliest example of writing the word of God appears in Exodus, where Moses was commanded to write down the words of the covenant (Exod 24:4, but see also Exod 17:14). It is specifically stated that Moses wrote the book of Deuteronomy (Deut 31:9, 24). The existence of the written book of the Law probably stimulated a tradition of writing down certain elements of what God was revealing (Josh 24:26; 1 Sam 10:25; 1 Chr 29:29; 2 Chr 9:29; Isa 8:16-17; 30:8). Many of Israel’s historical writings are said to have been kept by prophets (see 2 Chr 12:15; 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>These written documents, especially those written on leather scrolls, were kept in communities for a long time, and many copies were made from one document. These copies were so valuable that they were carefully preserved for centuries. The copies were also translated into any number of languages. The book of Jeremiah and the writings of other prophets, wise men, and teachers have been preserved, collected, and handed down to us as the Old and New Testaments, giving us a written record of God’s messages to his people (see 2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Pet 1:20-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:14; 31:18; 34:27-28; Deut 31:9-13; Isa 30:8; Jer 30:2-3; Jer 36:1-32; 45:1; 51:60-64; Ezek 43:11; Dan 7:1; Luke 1:1-4; John 5:46-47; 20:30-31; 21:24-25; Acts 1:1-2; Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11; 2 Tim 3:16-17; Phlm 1:21; Heb 13:22; 1 Pet 5:12; 2 Pet 1:20-21; 1 Jn 1:4; 2:12-24; 5:13; Rev 1:11; 10:4; 21:5; 22:18-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Written Word<\/h3>\n<p>When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah?<\/p>\n<p>As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast effectively in writing. The Lord told Jeremiah to write down all the messages he had ever delivered (Jer 36). Jeremiah had a helper, Baruch, who was skilled in writing and making as many copies as were needed. While Jeremiah and Baruch were in hiding, they purchased a scroll (a roll of papyrus) and prepared it so as to record the written messages. When the writing was finished, the scroll was read in the Temple courtyard and in the presence of King Jehoiakim. The king cut up the scroll and burned it, but Jeremiah had the messages rewritten on a new scroll, adding new material. Throughout the remainder of Jeremiah’s ministry, he had his messages written on papyrus and sent to the leaders of various countries, as well as to the exiles in Babylon (see Jer 29).<\/p>\n<p>The earliest example of writing the word of God appears in Exodus, where Moses was commanded to write down the words of the covenant (Exod 24:4, but see also Exod 17:14). It is specifically stated that Moses wrote the book of Deuteronomy (Deut 31:9, 24). The existence of the written book of the Law probably stimulated a tradition of writing down certain elements of what God was revealing (Josh 24:26; 1 Sam 10:25; 1 Chr 29:29; 2 Chr 9:29; Isa 8:16-17; 30:8). Many of Israel’s historical writings are said to have been kept by prophets (see 2 Chr 12:15; 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>These written documents, especially those written on leather scrolls, were kept in communities for a long time, and many copies were made from one document. These copies were so valuable that they were carefully preserved for centuries. The copies were also translated into any number of languages. The book of Jeremiah and the writings of other prophets, wise men, and teachers have been preserved, collected, and handed down to us as the Old and New Testaments, giving us a written record of God’s messages to his people (see 2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Pet 1:20-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:14; 31:18; 34:27-28; Deut 31:9-13; Isa 30:8; Jer 30:2-3; Jer 36:1-32; 45:1; 51:60-64; Ezek 43:11; Dan 7:1; Luke 1:1-4; John 5:46-47; 20:30-31; 21:24-25; Acts 1:1-2; Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11; 2 Tim 3:16-17; Phlm 1:21; Heb 13:22; 1 Pet 5:12; 2 Pet 1:20-21; 1 Jn 1:4; 2:12-24; 5:13; Rev 1:11; 10:4; 21:5; 22:18-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Written Word When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah? As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast eff...","summary_en":"The Written Word When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah? As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast eff...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147204,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Written Word","title_en":"The Written Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Written Word<\/h3>\n<p>When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah?<\/p>\n<p>As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast effectively in writing. The Lord told Jeremiah to write down all the messages he had ever delivered (Jer 36). Jeremiah had a helper, Baruch, who was skilled in writing and making as many copies as were needed. While Jeremiah and Baruch were in hiding, they purchased a scroll (a roll of papyrus) and prepared it so as to record the written messages. When the writing was finished, the scroll was read in the Temple courtyard and in the presence of King Jehoiakim. The king cut up the scroll and burned it, but Jeremiah had the messages rewritten on a new scroll, adding new material. Throughout the remainder of Jeremiah’s ministry, he had his messages written on papyrus and sent to the leaders of various countries, as well as to the exiles in Babylon (see Jer 29).<\/p>\n<p>The earliest example of writing the word of God appears in Exodus, where Moses was commanded to write down the words of the covenant (Exod 24:4, but see also Exod 17:14). It is specifically stated that Moses wrote the book of Deuteronomy (Deut 31:9, 24). The existence of the written book of the Law probably stimulated a tradition of writing down certain elements of what God was revealing (Josh 24:26; 1 Sam 10:25; 1 Chr 29:29; 2 Chr 9:29; Isa 8:16-17; 30:8). Many of Israel’s historical writings are said to have been kept by prophets (see 2 Chr 12:15; 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>These written documents, especially those written on leather scrolls, were kept in communities for a long time, and many copies were made from one document. These copies were so valuable that they were carefully preserved for centuries. The copies were also translated into any number of languages. The book of Jeremiah and the writings of other prophets, wise men, and teachers have been preserved, collected, and handed down to us as the Old and New Testaments, giving us a written record of God’s messages to his people (see 2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Pet 1:20-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:14; 31:18; 34:27-28; Deut 31:9-13; Isa 30:8; Jer 30:2-3; Jer 36:1-32; 45:1; 51:60-64; Ezek 43:11; Dan 7:1; Luke 1:1-4; John 5:46-47; 20:30-31; 21:24-25; Acts 1:1-2; Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11; 2 Tim 3:16-17; Phlm 1:21; Heb 13:22; 1 Pet 5:12; 2 Pet 1:20-21; 1 Jn 1:4; 2:12-24; 5:13; Rev 1:11; 10:4; 21:5; 22:18-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Written Word<\/h3>\n<p>When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah?<\/p>\n<p>As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast effectively in writing. The Lord told Jeremiah to write down all the messages he had ever delivered (Jer 36). Jeremiah had a helper, Baruch, who was skilled in writing and making as many copies as were needed. While Jeremiah and Baruch were in hiding, they purchased a scroll (a roll of papyrus) and prepared it so as to record the written messages. When the writing was finished, the scroll was read in the Temple courtyard and in the presence of King Jehoiakim. The king cut up the scroll and burned it, but Jeremiah had the messages rewritten on a new scroll, adding new material. Throughout the remainder of Jeremiah’s ministry, he had his messages written on papyrus and sent to the leaders of various countries, as well as to the exiles in Babylon (see Jer 29).<\/p>\n<p>The earliest example of writing the word of God appears in Exodus, where Moses was commanded to write down the words of the covenant (Exod 24:4, but see also Exod 17:14). It is specifically stated that Moses wrote the book of Deuteronomy (Deut 31:9, 24). The existence of the written book of the Law probably stimulated a tradition of writing down certain elements of what God was revealing (Josh 24:26; 1 Sam 10:25; 1 Chr 29:29; 2 Chr 9:29; Isa 8:16-17; 30:8). Many of Israel’s historical writings are said to have been kept by prophets (see 2 Chr 12:15; 13:22).<\/p>\n<p>These written documents, especially those written on leather scrolls, were kept in communities for a long time, and many copies were made from one document. These copies were so valuable that they were carefully preserved for centuries. The copies were also translated into any number of languages. The book of Jeremiah and the writings of other prophets, wise men, and teachers have been preserved, collected, and handed down to us as the Old and New Testaments, giving us a written record of God’s messages to his people (see 2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Pet 1:20-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:14; 31:18; 34:27-28; Deut 31:9-13; Isa 30:8; Jer 30:2-3; Jer 36:1-32; 45:1; 51:60-64; Ezek 43:11; Dan 7:1; Luke 1:1-4; John 5:46-47; 20:30-31; 21:24-25; Acts 1:1-2; Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11; 2 Tim 3:16-17; Phlm 1:21; Heb 13:22; 1 Pet 5:12; 2 Pet 1:20-21; 1 Jn 1:4; 2:12-24; 5:13; Rev 1:11; 10:4; 21:5; 22:18-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Written Word When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah? As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast eff...","summary_en":"The Written Word When Jeremiah’s ministry was in crisis during his public trial on the Temple grounds (Jer 26), some friends saved his life, but King Jehoiakim had the prophet Uriah killed and tried to arrest Jeremiah. Would this signal the end of Jeremiah’s public ministry? Was public speaking the only way to get the Lord’s messages to the leaders and people of Judah? As it turns out, killing and silencing the messengers did not stop the Lord’s messages—the Lord’s word could be broadcast eff...","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"}}