1
După aceea Domnul a mai rânduit alţi şaptezeci de ucenici, şi i-a trimes doi câte doi înaintea Lui, în toate cetăţile şi în toate locurile, pe unde avea să treacă El.
2
Şi le-a zis: ,,Mare este secerişul, dar puţini sânt lucrătorii! Rugaţi dar pe Domnul secerişului să scoată lucrători la secerişul Său.
3
Duceţi-vă; iată, vă trimet ca pe nişte miei în mijlocul lupilor.
4
Să nu luaţi cu voi nici pungă, nici traistă, nici încălţăminte, şi să nu întrebaţi pe nimeni de sănătate pe drum.
5
În orice casă veţi intra, să ziceţi întâi: ,,Pacea să fie peste casa aceasta!``
6
Şi dacă va fi acolo un fiu al păcii, pacea voastră va rămânea peste el; altminteri ea se va întoarce la voi.
7
Să rămâneţi în casa aceea, şi să mâncaţi şi să beţi ce vi se va da; căci vrednic este lucrătorul de plata sa. Să nu umblaţi din casă în casă.
8
În oricare cetate veţi intra şi unde vă vor primi oamenii, să mâncaţi ce vi se va pune înainte;
9
să vindecaţi pe bolnavii cari vor fi acolo, şi să le ziceţi: ,,Împărăţia lui Dumnezeu s-a apropiat de voi.``
10
Dar în oricare cetate veţi intra, şi nu vă vor primi, să vă duceţi pe uliţele ei, şi să ziceţi:
11
,,Scuturăm împotriva voastră, chiar şi praful din cetatea voastră, care s-a lipit de picioarele noastre; totuş să ştiţi că Împărăţia lui Dumnezeu s-a apropiat de voi.``
12
Eu vă spun că, în ziua judecăţii va fi mai uşor pentru Sodoma decât pentru cetatea aceea.
13
Vai de tine, Horazine! Vai de tine, Betsaido! Căci dacă ar fi fost făcute în Tir şi Sidon lucrările puternice cari au fost făcute în voi, de mult s-ar fi pocăit stând în sac şi cenuşă.
14
De aceea, în ziua judecăţii, va fi mai uşor pentru Tir şi Sidon decât pentru voi.
15
Şi tu, Capernaume, vei fi înălţat oare până la cer? Vei fi pogorât până în Locuinţa morţilor.
16
Cine vă ascultă pe voi, pe Mine Mă ascultă; şi cine vă nesocoteşte pe voi, pe Mine Mă nesocoteşte; iar cine Mă nesocoteşte pe Mine, nesocoteşte pe Cel ce M-a trimes pe Mine.``
17
Cei şaptezeci s-au întors plini de bucurie, şi au zis: ,,Doamne, chiar şi dracii ne sânt supuşi în Numele Tău.``
18
Isus le-a zis: ,,Am văzut pe Satana căzând ca un fulger din cer.``
19
Iată că v-am dat putere să călcaţi peste şerpi şi peste scorpii, şi peste toată puterea vrăjmaşului: şi nimic nu vă va putea vătăma.
20
Totuş, să nu vă bucuraţi de faptul că duhurile vă sânt supuse; ci bucuraţi-vă că numele voastre sânt scrise în ceruri.``
21
În ceasul acela, Isus S-a bucurat în Duhul Sfânt, şi a zis: ,,Tată, Doamne al cerului şi al pământului; Te laud pentrucă ai ascuns aceste lucruri de cei înţelepţi şi pricepuţi, şi le-ai descoperit pruncilor. Da, Tată, fiindcă aşa ai găsit cu cale Tu.``
22
Toate lucrurile Mi-au fost date în mâni de Tatăl Meu; şi nimeni nu ştie cine este Fiul, afară de Tatăl, nici cine este Tatăl, afară de Fiul şi acela căruia vrea Fiul să i -L descopere.``
23
Apoi S-a întors spre ucenici, şi le-a spus de o parte: ,,Ferice de ochii cari văd lucrurile, pe cari le vedeţi voi!
24
Căci vă spun că mulţi prooroci şi împăraţi au voit să vadă ce vedeţi voi, şi n-au văzut, să audă ce auziţi voi, şi n-au auzit.``
25
Un învăţător al Legii s-a sculat să ispitească pe Isus şi I-a zis: ,,Învăţătorule, ce să fac ca să moştenesc viaţa vecinică?``
26
Isus i-a zis: ,,Ce este scris în Lege? Cum citeşti în ea?``
27
El a răspuns: ,,Să iubeşti pe Domnul, Dumnezeul tău, cu toată inima ta, cu tot sufletul tău, cu toată puterea ta şi cu tot cugetul tău; şi pe aproapele tău ca pe tine însuţi.``
28
,,Bine ai răspuns``, i-a zis Isus; ,,fă aşa, şi vei avea viaţa vecinică.``
29
Dar el, care vroia să se îndreptăţească, a zis lui Isus: ,,Şi cine este aproapele meu?``
30
Isus a luat din nou cuvântul, şi a zis: ,,Un om se cobora din Ierusalim la Ierihon. A căzut între nişte tâlhari, cari l-au desbrăcat, l-au jăfuit de tot, l-au bătut zdravăn, au plecat, şi l-au lăsat aproape mort.
31
Din întâmplare, se cobora pe acelaş drum un preot; şi, când a văzut pe omul acesta, a trecut înainte pe alături.
32
Un Levit trecea şi el prin locul acela; şi când l-a văzut, a trecut înainte pe alături.
33
Dar un Samaritean, care era în călătorie, a venit în locul unde era el, şi când l-a văzut, i s-a făcut milă de el.
34
S-a apropiat de i-a legat rănile, şi a turnat peste ele untdelemn şi vin; apoi l-a pus pe dobitocul lui, l-a dus la un han, şi a îngrijit de el.
35
A doua zi, când a pornit la drum, a scos doi lei, i-a dat hangiului, şi i-a zis: ,,Ai grijă de el, şi orice vei mai cheltui, îţi voi da înapoi la întorcere.``
36
Care dintr-aceşti trei ţi se pare că a dat dovadă că este aproapele celui ce căzuse între tâlhari?``
37
,,Celce şi-a făcut milă cu el``, a răspuns învăţătorul Legii. ,,Du-te de fă şi tu la fel``, i-a zis Isus.
38
Pe când era pe drum, cu ucenicii Săi, Isus a intrat într-un sat. Şi o femeie, numită Marta, L-a primit în casa ei.
39
Ea avea o soră numită Maria, care s-a aşezat jos la picioarele Domnului, şi asculta cuvintele Lui.
40
Marta era împărţită cu multă slujire, a venit repede la El, şi I-a zis: ,,Doamne, nu-Ţi pasă că soru-mea m-a lăsat să slujesc singură? Zi-i dar să-mi ajute.``
41
Drept răspuns, Isus i-a zis: ,,Marto, Marto, pentru multe lucruri te îngrijorezi şi te frămânţi tu,
42
dar un singur lucru trebuieşte. Maria şi-a ales partea cea bună, care nu i se va lua.``
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":4867,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","title_en":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9652,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Disciple","title_en":"Disciple","content_ro":"<h3>DISCIPLE<\/h3>\n<p>Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels the immediate followers of Jesus, called by his authority from a wide variety of circumstances, not only the Twelve but all those who were sympathetic to his teaching and committed to him, are called “disciples.” The calling of these disciples took place at a time when other teachers had their disciples, most notably the Pharisees (Mk 2:18; Lk 5:33) and John the Baptist (Mt 9:14). It is evident from the practice of John the Baptist that different leaders called for different disciplines from their followers. John’s way was considerably more ascetic in character than that of Jesus; however, it too involved not only teaching regarding conduct and manner of life, but also a distinctive pattern of praying (Lk 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>The disciples of Jesus had a unique experience. Not only did they benefit from the immediate teaching of Jesus, his looks and tones of voice (Mk 10:21) as well as his words, but they were also witnesses of the unfolding drama of redemption that had Christ as its center. They followed a teacher who embodied the substance of that teaching. The first disciples could be taught by Christ only little by little, not only because of the need to remove their misconceptions (Mt 16:21), but also because the full significance of what Jesus said and did could not be most fully appreciated until after the events of his death and resurrection (Mt 28:9). It is not surprising that the period of “discipling” covered the time before and after Christ’s death and resurrection, and also after Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit taught the disciples about matters that they could not “bear” while Jesus remained on earth (Jn 16:12).<\/p>\n<p>Groups of Jesus’ first disciples, both the Twelve and the Seventy (Mt 26:20: Lk 10:1), received his teaching, taught others in turn (Lk 10:1-11), and were given power to heal (Mt 10:1). They were also to proclaim the message of salvation through Christ. Yet the Twelve were given special prominence, and with the exception of Judas Iscariot (whose place was taken by Matthias, Acts 1:26), they became the foundation teachers of the newly emerging Christian church. Their authority in the church, given by Christ (Mt 16:19; 28:16-20), was to be characterized by a unique style of self-giving service (Lk 22:24-30). To this group of disciples, who came to be known as the apostles (though this term is occasionally given to a wider application), Saul of Tarsus was added. At his conversion on the road to Damascus, he saw the risen Lord and was immediately commissioned by Christ (Gal 1:12, 16) as the apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of his ascension Christ commissioned the first disciples to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19); hence, the term “disciple” is also used in the book of Acts to describe believers, those who confess Christ. Though they have not been directly called by Christ himself, such disciples are called by Christ’s Spirit through the message delivered by the first disciples; disciples called later are not in any sense inferior to the first disciples, even though they are less privileged. It was proper for early Christians to be called disciples of Jesus of Nazareth or simply “the disciples” (Acts 6:1-2, 7; 9:36; 11:26) because they were carrying on the teaching of Jesus and living the life he had exemplified. They were thus recognized as a “school” or living community that embodied the teaching of their “master” in practice. The book of 1 John emphasizes that only those who keep Christ’s commandments show real love for God (1 Jn 2:3-6; 3:10-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DISCIPLE<\/h3>\n<p>Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels the immediate followers of Jesus, called by his authority from a wide variety of circumstances, not only the Twelve but all those who were sympathetic to his teaching and committed to him, are called “disciples.” The calling of these disciples took place at a time when other teachers had their disciples, most notably the Pharisees (Mk 2:18; Lk 5:33) and John the Baptist (Mt 9:14). It is evident from the practice of John the Baptist that different leaders called for different disciplines from their followers. John’s way was considerably more ascetic in character than that of Jesus; however, it too involved not only teaching regarding conduct and manner of life, but also a distinctive pattern of praying (Lk 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>The disciples of Jesus had a unique experience. Not only did they benefit from the immediate teaching of Jesus, his looks and tones of voice (Mk 10:21) as well as his words, but they were also witnesses of the unfolding drama of redemption that had Christ as its center. They followed a teacher who embodied the substance of that teaching. The first disciples could be taught by Christ only little by little, not only because of the need to remove their misconceptions (Mt 16:21), but also because the full significance of what Jesus said and did could not be most fully appreciated until after the events of his death and resurrection (Mt 28:9). It is not surprising that the period of “discipling” covered the time before and after Christ’s death and resurrection, and also after Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit taught the disciples about matters that they could not “bear” while Jesus remained on earth (Jn 16:12).<\/p>\n<p>Groups of Jesus’ first disciples, both the Twelve and the Seventy (Mt 26:20: Lk 10:1), received his teaching, taught others in turn (Lk 10:1-11), and were given power to heal (Mt 10:1). They were also to proclaim the message of salvation through Christ. Yet the Twelve were given special prominence, and with the exception of Judas Iscariot (whose place was taken by Matthias, Acts 1:26), they became the foundation teachers of the newly emerging Christian church. Their authority in the church, given by Christ (Mt 16:19; 28:16-20), was to be characterized by a unique style of self-giving service (Lk 22:24-30). To this group of disciples, who came to be known as the apostles (though this term is occasionally given to a wider application), Saul of Tarsus was added. At his conversion on the road to Damascus, he saw the risen Lord and was immediately commissioned by Christ (Gal 1:12, 16) as the apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of his ascension Christ commissioned the first disciples to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19); hence, the term “disciple” is also used in the book of Acts to describe believers, those who confess Christ. Though they have not been directly called by Christ himself, such disciples are called by Christ’s Spirit through the message delivered by the first disciples; disciples called later are not in any sense inferior to the first disciples, even though they are less privileged. It was proper for early Christians to be called disciples of Jesus of Nazareth or simply “the disciples” (Acts 6:1-2, 7; 9:36; 11:26) because they were carrying on the teaching of Jesus and living the life he had exemplified. They were thus recognized as a “school” or living community that embodied the teaching of their “master” in practice. The book of 1 John emphasizes that only those who keep Christ’s commandments show real love for God (1 Jn 2:3-6; 3:10-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"DISCIPLE Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present. In ...","summary_en":"DISCIPLE Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present. In ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15642,"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":20117,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John (Person)","title_en":"John (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li> 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name.<\/li>\n<li> 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6).<\/li>\n<li> 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a member of the larger group of Jesus’ disciples outside the Twelve (cf. Lk 10:1). Known as “John the elder” (the presbyter), he is often credited with the authorship of 2 and 3 John (2 Jn 1:1; 3 Jn 1:1), although the term “elder” there more likely refers to John the apostle.<\/li>\n<li> 4. The apostle. <em>See<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>5. The Baptist. <em>See<\/em> John the Baptist.<\/li>\n<li>6. An early disciple known as John Mark, author of the second Gospel. <em>See<\/em> Mark, John.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li> 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name.<\/li>\n<li> 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6).<\/li>\n<li> 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a member of the larger group of Jesus’ disciples outside the Twelve (cf. Lk 10:1). Known as “John the elder” (the presbyter), he is often credited with the authorship of 2 and 3 John (2 Jn 1:1; 3 Jn 1:1), although the term “elder” there more likely refers to John the apostle.<\/li>\n<li> 4. The apostle. <em>See<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>5. The Baptist. <em>See<\/em> John the Baptist.<\/li>\n<li>6. An early disciple known as John Mark, author of the second Gospel. <em>See<\/em> Mark, John.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOHN (Person) 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name. 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6). 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a membe...","summary_en":"JOHN (Person) 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name. 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6). 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a membe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55872,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1-20<\/strong> <em>The Lord now chose seventy-two:<\/em> The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gentiles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1-20<\/strong> <em>The Lord now chose seventy-two:<\/em> The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gentiles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1-20 The Lord now chose seventy-two: The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gen...","summary_en":"10:1-20 The Lord now chose seventy-two: The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gen...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83498,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1-20<\/strong> <em>The Lord now chose seventy-two:<\/em> The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gentiles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1-20<\/strong> <em>The Lord now chose seventy-two:<\/em> The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gentiles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1-20 The Lord now chose seventy-two: The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gen...","summary_en":"10:1-20 The Lord now chose seventy-two: The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gen...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111124,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1-20<\/strong> <em>The Lord now chose seventy-two:<\/em> The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gentiles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1-20<\/strong> <em>The Lord now chose seventy-two:<\/em> The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gentiles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1-20 The Lord now chose seventy-two: The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gen...","summary_en":"10:1-20 The Lord now chose seventy-two: The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gen...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138750,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1-20<\/strong> <em>The Lord now chose seventy-two:<\/em> The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gentiles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1-20<\/strong> <em>The Lord now chose seventy-two:<\/em> The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gentiles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1-20 The Lord now chose seventy-two: The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gen...","summary_en":"10:1-20 The Lord now chose seventy-two: The mission of the Twelve (9:1-6) represented Jesus’ ministry to Israel; this mission represented his outreach to the Gentiles. The number 72 represents the nations of the world. Genesis 10 lists 70 nations in the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint—the Greek Old Testament—lists 72. Luke, who used the Septuagint, probably wrote 72, and then a later scribe “corrected” the text to agree with the Hebrew. The point is that the Good News is for both Jews and Gen...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":55873,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:2","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>The harvest<\/em> refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. <em>More workers<\/em> were needed.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>The harvest<\/em> refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. <em>More workers<\/em> were needed.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:2 The harvest refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. More workers were needed.","summary_en":"10:2 The harvest refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. More workers were needed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83499,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:2","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>The harvest<\/em> refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. <em>More workers<\/em> were needed.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>The harvest<\/em> refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. <em>More workers<\/em> were needed.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:2 The harvest refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. More workers were needed.","summary_en":"10:2 The harvest refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. More workers were needed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111125,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:2","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>The harvest<\/em> refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. <em>More workers<\/em> were needed.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>The harvest<\/em> refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. <em>More workers<\/em> were needed.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:2 The harvest refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. More workers were needed.","summary_en":"10:2 The harvest refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. More workers were needed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138751,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:2","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>The harvest<\/em> refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. <em>More workers<\/em> were needed.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>The harvest<\/em> refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. <em>More workers<\/em> were needed.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:2 The harvest refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. More workers were needed.","summary_en":"10:2 The harvest refers to people who need to hear the Good News and be gathered to God’s presence (cp. Isa 27:12). There was urgency to the task, just as crops have to be brought in at the exact time when they are ripe. More workers were needed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":55874,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:3","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:3<\/strong> <em>lambs among wolves:<\/em> Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:3<\/strong> <em>lambs among wolves:<\/em> Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:3 lambs among wolves: Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.","summary_en":"10:3 lambs among wolves: Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83500,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:3","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:3<\/strong> <em>lambs among wolves:<\/em> Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:3<\/strong> <em>lambs among wolves:<\/em> Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:3 lambs among wolves: Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.","summary_en":"10:3 lambs among wolves: Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111126,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:3","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:3<\/strong> <em>lambs among wolves:<\/em> Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:3<\/strong> <em>lambs among wolves:<\/em> Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:3 lambs among wolves: Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.","summary_en":"10:3 lambs among wolves: Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138752,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:3","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:3<\/strong> <em>lambs among wolves:<\/em> Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:3<\/strong> <em>lambs among wolves:<\/em> Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:3 lambs among wolves: Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.","summary_en":"10:3 lambs among wolves: Jesus’ followers are not to dominate others, but to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. This makes them vulnerable (see Jer 5:6; Ezek 22:27; Hab 1:8; Zeph 3:3), but the Good Shepherd (Ps 23:1) protects them from the wolves.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":6956,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Clothing","title_en":"Clothing","content_ro":"<h3>CLOTHING<\/h3>\n<p>Clothing mentioned in the Bible is usually referred to in such general terms as “inner garment,” “outer garment,” or “tunic.” Few descriptions give specific details of costumes or clothing, and it is therefore necessary to rely on paintings, pottery, decorations, statues, and bas-reliefs to show the clothing styles of the period.<\/p>\n<p>Many ancient Near Eastern peoples (including the Israelites) kept flocks of sheep before the discovery of spinning and weaving and used the leather of their hides for clothing. Later, wool plucked from the sheep and from branches on which the fleece had accumulated as the animals brushed past was made into a feltlike fabric. Wool remained one of the most important fabrics for clothing throughout the biblical period.<\/p>\n<p>As the seminomadic Israelite tribes became more sedentary in nature, flax was cultivated. It was woven into linen, which became a commonly used fabric. At the beginning of the middle Bronze Age (c. 2000 <span>BC<\/span>), fine silks began to be imported from China, and wild silk was produced in some areas of the Near East. Cotton was known in Egypt, but it does not appear to have been produced anywhere in Palestine in the biblical period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaleClothing\">Male Clothing<\/p>\n<p>Early in biblical times the loincloth formed an important item of male clothing that was worn by all levels of society. Prior to 2000 <span>BC<\/span>, a type of loincloth was also the customary piece of clothing for all Egyptians, from the lowliest laborer to the pharaoh. At a later period, however, it appeared only as part of military dress (Ez 23:15). The inner garment (a tunic or shirt) was made of wool or linen. It had openings for the neck and arms, and appears to have had long sleeves, although some styles had half sleeves. It was worn next to the skin and fell either to the knees or, more often, to the ankles, frequently being belted at the waist. The Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">chiton<\/span> (“coat”) and the Roman tunic would have been undergarments of a similar character. A man who was wearing nothing except this undergarment was considered “naked.” The young man who followed after Jesus at Gethsemane at his arrest was probably attired in this manner (Mk 14:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Generally speaking, the outer garment, formed out of a square-shaped piece of cloth, was referred to as a cloak or mantle. It had openings for the arms and was draped over one or both shoulders.<\/p>\n<p>A Hebrew man was considered improperly dressed without his cloak, and one was forbidden to demand another’s mantle as a loan or pledge. At night, when the other items of clothing were removed, the cloak, which was often made of animal skin or wool, was used as a blanket (Ex 22:26-27; Dt 24:13). Cloaks made of goat’s hair or camel’s hair, such as John the Baptist wore (Mt 3:4; Mk 1:6), would have been particularly warm at night.<\/p>\n<p>The coat of many colors that Jacob gave to Joseph was probably a striped shirt or tunic made of leather or wool felt. The entire garment may have been bound with a woolen border (Gn 37:3). The garment Hannah made each year for the young Samuel was probably a coat or mantle (1 Sm 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Cloaks were usually made with a hem; it was this that the woman touched when she came to Jesus for healing (Mt 9:20). The robe that Roman soldiers placed derisively upon Jesus to symbolize his kingship was probably a purple military cloak such as Roman officers commonly wore (Mt 27:28-31; Mk 15:17; Jn 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks used the term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">himation<\/span> for an outer garment, similar to the robe that was placed on the prodigal son (Lk 15:22) when his father celebrated the son’s return with his best food, clothing, and jewelry. The cloak that Paul wore (2 Tm 4:13) may well have been a circular style of cape that was popular in the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Garments were of different qualities and signified rank or office (Is 3:6). The scribes and prophets wore special mantles symbolic of their professions. Elijah wore a prophet’s mantle (1 Kgs 19:13, 19; 2 Kgs 2:8, 13-14). In NT times scribes wore special robes (Mk 12:38; Lk 20:46).<\/p>\n<p>Christ and his disciples probably wore tunics and sandals, and carried moneybags and staffs (Mt 10:9-10; Mk 6:8; Lk 9:3; 10:4). When Roman soldiers divided Jesus’ clothing after the Crucifixion (Jn 19:23-24), they cast lots for the inner garment, one woven without any seams and probably made of wool. This was the most valuable of Jesus’ items of clothing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Footwear\">Footwear<\/p>\n<p>In Bible times footwear consisted of shoes and sandals, which were an essential part of a person’s wardrobe (2 Chr 28:15; Acts 12:8). Occasionally sandals had wooden soles, but usually they were leather. Sometimes they had an enclosed upper front and open back. The upper part was typically made of open strips of leather, and sometimes the sandal merely consisted of a sole with thongs laced around the leg or ankle. A woman’s sandals were considered an attractive and fashionable part of her wardrobe (Jdt 10:4; 16:9).<\/p>\n<p>On a long journey through the country, one’s sandals might be carried and saved for arrival in the next town, so that they would not be worn out. (Being barefoot in a town or city was a sign of abject poverty.) Since sandals were so open in design, one can easily understand the necessity for the ritual foot washing of a guest.<\/p>\n<p>Shoes were not worn in the temple or on any holy ground (Ex 3:5; Jos 5:15) and were also taken off when a person was in a house. It was customary to remove the sandals at a time of mourning. The shoes that the Israelites wore in their wilderness wanderings did not wear out (Dt 29:5).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CLOTHING<\/h3>\n<p>Clothing mentioned in the Bible is usually referred to in such general terms as “inner garment,” “outer garment,” or “tunic.” Few descriptions give specific details of costumes or clothing, and it is therefore necessary to rely on paintings, pottery, decorations, statues, and bas-reliefs to show the clothing styles of the period.<\/p>\n<p>Many ancient Near Eastern peoples (including the Israelites) kept flocks of sheep before the discovery of spinning and weaving and used the leather of their hides for clothing. Later, wool plucked from the sheep and from branches on which the fleece had accumulated as the animals brushed past was made into a feltlike fabric. Wool remained one of the most important fabrics for clothing throughout the biblical period.<\/p>\n<p>As the seminomadic Israelite tribes became more sedentary in nature, flax was cultivated. It was woven into linen, which became a commonly used fabric. At the beginning of the middle Bronze Age (c. 2000 <span>BC<\/span>), fine silks began to be imported from China, and wild silk was produced in some areas of the Near East. Cotton was known in Egypt, but it does not appear to have been produced anywhere in Palestine in the biblical period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaleClothing\">Male Clothing<\/p>\n<p>Early in biblical times the loincloth formed an important item of male clothing that was worn by all levels of society. Prior to 2000 <span>BC<\/span>, a type of loincloth was also the customary piece of clothing for all Egyptians, from the lowliest laborer to the pharaoh. At a later period, however, it appeared only as part of military dress (Ez 23:15). The inner garment (a tunic or shirt) was made of wool or linen. It had openings for the neck and arms, and appears to have had long sleeves, although some styles had half sleeves. It was worn next to the skin and fell either to the knees or, more often, to the ankles, frequently being belted at the waist. The Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">chiton<\/span> (“coat”) and the Roman tunic would have been undergarments of a similar character. A man who was wearing nothing except this undergarment was considered “naked.” The young man who followed after Jesus at Gethsemane at his arrest was probably attired in this manner (Mk 14:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Generally speaking, the outer garment, formed out of a square-shaped piece of cloth, was referred to as a cloak or mantle. It had openings for the arms and was draped over one or both shoulders.<\/p>\n<p>A Hebrew man was considered improperly dressed without his cloak, and one was forbidden to demand another’s mantle as a loan or pledge. At night, when the other items of clothing were removed, the cloak, which was often made of animal skin or wool, was used as a blanket (Ex 22:26-27; Dt 24:13). Cloaks made of goat’s hair or camel’s hair, such as John the Baptist wore (Mt 3:4; Mk 1:6), would have been particularly warm at night.<\/p>\n<p>The coat of many colors that Jacob gave to Joseph was probably a striped shirt or tunic made of leather or wool felt. The entire garment may have been bound with a woolen border (Gn 37:3). The garment Hannah made each year for the young Samuel was probably a coat or mantle (1 Sm 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Cloaks were usually made with a hem; it was this that the woman touched when she came to Jesus for healing (Mt 9:20). The robe that Roman soldiers placed derisively upon Jesus to symbolize his kingship was probably a purple military cloak such as Roman officers commonly wore (Mt 27:28-31; Mk 15:17; Jn 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks used the term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">himation<\/span> for an outer garment, similar to the robe that was placed on the prodigal son (Lk 15:22) when his father celebrated the son’s return with his best food, clothing, and jewelry. The cloak that Paul wore (2 Tm 4:13) may well have been a circular style of cape that was popular in the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Garments were of different qualities and signified rank or office (Is 3:6). The scribes and prophets wore special mantles symbolic of their professions. Elijah wore a prophet’s mantle (1 Kgs 19:13, 19; 2 Kgs 2:8, 13-14). In NT times scribes wore special robes (Mk 12:38; Lk 20:46).<\/p>\n<p>Christ and his disciples probably wore tunics and sandals, and carried moneybags and staffs (Mt 10:9-10; Mk 6:8; Lk 9:3; 10:4). When Roman soldiers divided Jesus’ clothing after the Crucifixion (Jn 19:23-24), they cast lots for the inner garment, one woven without any seams and probably made of wool. This was the most valuable of Jesus’ items of clothing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Footwear\">Footwear<\/p>\n<p>In Bible times footwear consisted of shoes and sandals, which were an essential part of a person’s wardrobe (2 Chr 28:15; Acts 12:8). Occasionally sandals had wooden soles, but usually they were leather. Sometimes they had an enclosed upper front and open back. The upper part was typically made of open strips of leather, and sometimes the sandal merely consisted of a sole with thongs laced around the leg or ankle. A woman’s sandals were considered an attractive and fashionable part of her wardrobe (Jdt 10:4; 16:9).<\/p>\n<p>On a long journey through the country, one’s sandals might be carried and saved for arrival in the next town, so that they would not be worn out. (Being barefoot in a town or city was a sign of abject poverty.) Since sandals were so open in design, one can easily understand the necessity for the ritual foot washing of a guest.<\/p>\n<p>Shoes were not worn in the temple or on any holy ground (Ex 3:5; Jos 5:15) and were also taken off when a person was in a house. It was customary to remove the sandals at a time of mourning. The shoes that the Israelites wore in their wilderness wanderings did not wear out (Dt 29:5).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CLOTHING Clothing mentioned in the Bible is usually referred to in such general terms as “inner garment,” “outer garment,” or “tunic.” Few descriptions give specific details of costumes or clothing, and it is therefore necessary to rely on paintings, pottery, decorations, statues, and bas-reliefs to show the clothing styles of the period. Many ancient Near Eastern peoples (including the Israelites) kept flocks of sheep before the discovery of spinning and weaving and used the leather of their...","summary_en":"CLOTHING Clothing mentioned in the Bible is usually referred to in such general terms as “inner garment,” “outer garment,” or “tunic.” Few descriptions give specific details of costumes or clothing, and it is therefore necessary to rely on paintings, pottery, decorations, statues, and bas-reliefs to show the clothing styles of the period. Many ancient Near Eastern peoples (including the Israelites) kept flocks of sheep before the discovery of spinning and weaving and used the leather of their...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32195,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Purse","title_en":"Purse","content_ro":"<h3>PURSE<\/h3>\n<p>A small bag or receptacle in which money and often other small objects would be carried. There are basically three Hebrew words and three Greek words referring to such a purse or pouch. The first refers to a purse or bag in which money or stone weights used with the balance scales were carried (Dt 25:13; Prv 1:14; Is 46:6; Mi 6:11). It could be made of leather or stout cotton. Another Hebrew word referring to much the same kind of pouch is found in 2 Kings 5:23. This same word also appears in a list of ladies’ finery in Isaiah 3:22 and may therefore have been a more ornamentally woven pouch than the first described above. The third Hebrew word appears in Genesis 42:35 and refers to a little bag with an open mouth. This was the small bag or purse in which Joseph’s brothers’ money had been placed before it was put into their sacks of grain.<\/p>\n<p>The corresponding Greek word for the Hebrew words discussed above means a money bag or purse. When Jesus sent out his disciples two by two, he prohibited them from taking, among other things, a purse (Lk 10:4; 22:35-36). In Luke 12:33 this same word for purse is used figuratively for treasure in heaven that cannot be exhausted, stolen, or destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word indicates another normal place for the carrying of money, the girdle or the belt, which was an essential part of dress for both men and women in the ancient East. When made of leather, they were made hollow or with slots for the purpose of carrying coins. When made of cloth, they were folded in such a manner that money could be carried in the folds, which served as pockets (Mt 10:9; Mk 6:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for the “money bag” that Judas is said to have kept for the disciples refers to a case or container for the mouthpiece of a wind instrument. By NT times it had become the Greek word for a money box or possibly a money bag (Jn 12:6; 13:29), and hence another NT word for purse.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PURSE<\/h3>\n<p>A small bag or receptacle in which money and often other small objects would be carried. There are basically three Hebrew words and three Greek words referring to such a purse or pouch. The first refers to a purse or bag in which money or stone weights used with the balance scales were carried (Dt 25:13; Prv 1:14; Is 46:6; Mi 6:11). It could be made of leather or stout cotton. Another Hebrew word referring to much the same kind of pouch is found in 2 Kings 5:23. This same word also appears in a list of ladies’ finery in Isaiah 3:22 and may therefore have been a more ornamentally woven pouch than the first described above. The third Hebrew word appears in Genesis 42:35 and refers to a little bag with an open mouth. This was the small bag or purse in which Joseph’s brothers’ money had been placed before it was put into their sacks of grain.<\/p>\n<p>The corresponding Greek word for the Hebrew words discussed above means a money bag or purse. When Jesus sent out his disciples two by two, he prohibited them from taking, among other things, a purse (Lk 10:4; 22:35-36). In Luke 12:33 this same word for purse is used figuratively for treasure in heaven that cannot be exhausted, stolen, or destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word indicates another normal place for the carrying of money, the girdle or the belt, which was an essential part of dress for both men and women in the ancient East. When made of leather, they were made hollow or with slots for the purpose of carrying coins. When made of cloth, they were folded in such a manner that money could be carried in the folds, which served as pockets (Mt 10:9; Mk 6:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for the “money bag” that Judas is said to have kept for the disciples refers to a case or container for the mouthpiece of a wind instrument. By NT times it had become the Greek word for a money box or possibly a money bag (Jn 12:6; 13:29), and hence another NT word for purse.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PURSE A small bag or receptacle in which money and often other small objects would be carried. There are basically three Hebrew words and three Greek words referring to such a purse or pouch. The first refers to a purse or bag in which money or stone weights used with the balance scales were carried (Dt 25:13; Prv 1:14; Is 46:6; Mi 6:11). It could be made of leather or stout cotton. Another Hebrew word referring to much the same kind of pouch is found in 2 Kings 5:23. This same word also appe...","summary_en":"PURSE A small bag or receptacle in which money and often other small objects would be carried. There are basically three Hebrew words and three Greek words referring to such a purse or pouch. The first refers to a purse or bag in which money or stone weights used with the balance scales were carried (Dt 25:13; Prv 1:14; Is 46:6; Mi 6:11). It could be made of leather or stout cotton. Another Hebrew word referring to much the same kind of pouch is found in 2 Kings 5:23. This same word also appe...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55875,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:4","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:4<\/strong> <em>Don’t take any money with you:<\/em> Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • <em>don’t stop to greet anyone on the road:<\/em> This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:4<\/strong> <em>Don’t take any money with you:<\/em> Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • <em>don’t stop to greet anyone on the road:<\/em> This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:4 Don’t take any money with you: Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • don’t stop to greet anyone on the road: This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.","summary_en":"10:4 Don’t take any money with you: Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • don’t stop to greet anyone on the road: This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83501,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:4","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:4<\/strong> <em>Don’t take any money with you:<\/em> Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • <em>don’t stop to greet anyone on the road:<\/em> This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:4<\/strong> <em>Don’t take any money with you:<\/em> Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • <em>don’t stop to greet anyone on the road:<\/em> This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:4 Don’t take any money with you: Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • don’t stop to greet anyone on the road: This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.","summary_en":"10:4 Don’t take any money with you: Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • don’t stop to greet anyone on the road: This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111127,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:4","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:4<\/strong> <em>Don’t take any money with you:<\/em> Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • <em>don’t stop to greet anyone on the road:<\/em> This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:4<\/strong> <em>Don’t take any money with you:<\/em> Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • <em>don’t stop to greet anyone on the road:<\/em> This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:4 Don’t take any money with you: Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • don’t stop to greet anyone on the road: This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.","summary_en":"10:4 Don’t take any money with you: Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • don’t stop to greet anyone on the road: This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138753,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:4","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:4<\/strong> <em>Don’t take any money with you:<\/em> Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • <em>don’t stop to greet anyone on the road:<\/em> This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:4<\/strong> <em>Don’t take any money with you:<\/em> Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • <em>don’t stop to greet anyone on the road:<\/em> This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:4 Don’t take any money with you: Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • don’t stop to greet anyone on the road: This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.","summary_en":"10:4 Don’t take any money with you: Cp. 9:3. Jesus’ disciples were to depend on God and on the help of those whom they served. • don’t stop to greet anyone on the road: This did not mean being antisocial, but staying focused on the task Jesus had given them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":7609,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"First Letter to the Corinthians","title_en":"First Letter to the Corinthians","content_ro":"<h3>CORINTHIANS, First Letter to the<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Origin<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt about who wrote 1 Corinthians, for all scholars agree that the apostle Paul wrote it on his third missionary journey while he was living in Ephesus. By this time Paul was a mature, middle-aged (perhaps 55 years old) missionary, fully seasoned from planting churches around a quarter of the Mediterranean world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandOrigin\">Date and Origin<\/p>\n<p>Paul worked in Corinth from about <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 52. After a brief stay in Jerusalem, he returned to his missionary work, this time at Ephesus (Acts 19), where he ministered for three years (<span>AD<\/span> 53–55\/56). During this period, he wrote at least three letters to Corinth and made a visit as well. His first letter, often called “the previous letter,” is referred to in 1 Corinthians 5:9-11. We know from this reference that the letter was misunderstood, but we know little of its content, for it has been lost.<\/p>\n<p>Sometime in <span>AD<\/span> 55, after hearing reports from Chloe’s household (1 Cor 1:11), who were probably members of Chloe’s house church, he dictated a second letter to Corinth, our 1 Corinthians. This was probably sent off in the hands of Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (16:17). Paul would later write a third letter to Corinth, called “the letter of tears” (2 Cor 2:2-3), and then finally 2 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Corinth was a seaport city, destroyed by the Romans in 146 <span>BC<\/span> and rebuilt in 46 <span>BC<\/span> by Julius Caesar. After 27 <span>BC<\/span>, it was the Roman capital of Achaia, where the proconsul had his residence (Acts 18:12). The city itself was really three cities: the port of Cenchrea, about eight miles (13 kilometers) to the east, where ships from the Aegean would unload; the port of Lechaion, about a mile (1.6 kilometers) to the west on the Gulf of Corinth, where the ships would be reloaded, their goods having been transported in wagons over the isthmus and the ships on rollers; and the city itself on the high ground in between.<\/p>\n<p>The acropolis of the city, on top of the steep, high Acrocorinth, contained the temple of Aphrodite, where 1,000 female slaves were dedicated to the service of this goddess of love. This distinctive cult of Corinth was dedicated to the veneration of Aphrodite, goddess of love, beauty, and fertility, who is identified with the Roman Venus. Associated with such religious practices was a general moral degradation. Corinthian morals were notoriously corrupt, even when compared with pagan Rome. Down in the city was the synagogue (Acts 18:4); for while the city as a Roman colony was largely populated by Italians, it had attracted other peoples from the Mediterranean, among whom were the Jews.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTeaching\">Purpose and Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The main concern of Paul in 1 Corinthians was the unity of the church. There was a self-centeredness in Corinth that resulted in building cliques within the church, in flaunting knowledge and liberty in the face of others scandalized by it, and in selfish displays in the worship services.<\/p>\n<p>Two other major concerns also surface in the book. First, along with other pagan practices, the lax sexual ethics of Corinth had influenced the church; Paul needed to erect some barriers. Second, there was a problem in accepting the resurrection of the body; Paul realized that this issue had implications for the core of the faith and vigorously affirmed the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>Both of these latter two areas, as well as aspects of the unity issue (particularly their concern with knowledge), have been identified by some scholars as Gnostic motifs, leading to the conclusion that Paul was opposing a Gnostic party in Corinth. Careful examination reveals, however, that while some of the elements floating in the Corinthian milieu would later contribute to the development of Gnosticism, it would be anachronistic to call them gnostic. While recognizing protognostic ideas in the Corinthian situation, it is important to keep interpretation within the first-century context.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the focus of Paul’s concern was the church, its unity and purity. Paul was fighting to keep this church from disintegrating into a number of competing and bickering factions divided over moral and doctrinal issues. Furthermore, he wanted to keep the focus of the church on Jesus, the exalted Lord.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Greeting, 1:1-9<\/h5>\n<p>Paul begins with a standard greeting, followed by his usual thanksgiving prayer. Two features stand out. First, the greeting associates Sosthenes with Paul. While we cannot be sure who Sosthenes was, he was surely well known to the Corinthians; probably he was the Sosthenes whom Acts 18:17 identifies as the ruler of the synagogue, following the conversion of Crispus.<\/p>\n<p>Second, Paul stresses the Corinthians’ abilities in speech, knowledge, and spiritual gifts. They had all of these, and these were genuine, but it was precisely these good things that they were abusing. Paul’s solution is not to suppress these gifts (indeed, he thanks God for them), but to place them in a new context.<\/p>\n<h5>Report from Chloe’s People, 1:10–4:21<\/h5>\n<p>The Corinthians had made Paul, Cephas (Peter), Apollos, and even Christ into party leaders. We are not sure what each of these groups stood for, but one might guess that the Pauline group stressed Paul’s slogans of liberty; the Petrine group, the need to hold to Jewish practices; and the Apollos group, the value of philosophical understanding and oratory. Whatever they stood for, Paul is appalled that it breaks their unity. His first response is to argue that his behavior was not calculated to build a following but to point to Christ. That is, he did not insist on personally baptizing converts; who performed these acts did not matter, since they were all baptized into Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Paul immediately moves to the underlying issue, that of various persons wanting to show themselves better or wiser than others who did not have the insights of their party in the church. Their seeking for wisdom contradicts Paul’s preaching of the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>First, the message of a crucified Christ (1:18) made no sense within the wisdom and values of either Jews or Greeks. It demanded a whole new way of looking on life—God’s way.<\/p>\n<p>Second, God had not chosen them on the basis of their status in society; quite the contrary, he had made their only status the equal status they received from him (1:26-31).<\/p>\n<p>Third, their faith had not been based on Paul’s oratory but on the gifts of the Spirit that Paul had manifested (2:4), which had convinced them that God was acting in Paul. Thus, it was not argument that led them to God, but God’s Spirit. Therefore it was the Spirit, not human reasoning, that would continue to reveal God to them. Unless they became fools with respect to the world’s ways of reasoning, they would never be able to rethink life from the perspective of the Spirit, who gives true wisdom.<\/p>\n<p>Fourth, they were not acting on this spiritual level when they claimed Paul and others as party leaders; this activity demonstrates the evil impulse in human beings (“the flesh” or “fallen human nature”) at work since it elevates human servants rather than the God who works equally in each of them.<\/p>\n<p>Fifth, these servants were working together to build one “temple” for God based on the one foundation in Jesus Christ, that is, the church. God alone will judge how each Christian contributes to the work of building the church. But woe to the person who divides the church, for “if anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him” (3:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). (Note that here the temple imagery is used collectively; the church is the temple. In chapter 6 it will be used individually; each Christian is the temple.)<\/p>\n<p>Finally, he points to their overrealized eschatology, for with their spiritual gifts (which were genuine) and vaunted wisdom (which was worldly) they claimed they were reigning with Christ (4:8-13). Paul, with ironic sarcasm, points out how different this claim is from the lifestyle of the apostles. The apostles lived like Jesus—a life of suffering, expecting exaltation later. The Corinthians were trying to have their exaltation now without crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Paul closes this section with an admonition. He softens his words toward some who would be responsive, urging them to copy his lifestyle. The teacher was the message (vv 14-16). Timothy will also faithfully live the truth before them. Then he threatens the “arrogant” (v 18), pointing out that he will not challenge their words but their spiritual power if he comes.<\/p>\n<h5>The Report from the Corinthian Messengers, 5:1–6:20<\/h5>\n<p>Paul now turns to three issues raised by oral reports from the messengers bearing the Corinthians’ letter to him.<\/p>\n<p>The first issue is that of church discipline (5:12-13). Paul cites a case of flagrant immorality—that of incest. This immorality was so clear (even pagans considered it immoral), that it was not a case of ignorance of Christian principles. Further, the church had taken no action but rather boasted in its tolerance, perhaps on the basis of a misunderstanding of Paul’s teaching on freedom from the law.<\/p>\n<p>Paul presents three principles in this section: (1) the primary goal of church discipline is the repentance and restoration of the offender; (2) the secondary goal of church discipline is the protection of the church (5:6-8); and (3) the church is not to seek to judge or control the actions of evil persons in the world—they are God’s responsibility—but to discipline those within the church (vv 9-13). Paul will use these principles also in the following chapters (cf. 7:12-16).<\/p>\n<p>The second issue is that of lawsuits between Christians (6:1-11). The Corinthian society was as prone to litigation as our own, and Christians did not see anything wrong in suing each other. Paul was troubled. If Christians are to judge the world, they certainly should not bring the world in to judge issues within the church. Rather than put their cases before “those who are least esteemed by the church” (6:4, <span>rsv<\/span>, i.e., pagan judges), they should decide the cases within the church.<\/p>\n<p>Paul has an even better way than bypassing the pagan courts, and that is to simply suffer the wrong (1 Cor 6:7). Applying the teaching of Jesus quite literally (Mt 5:38-42), Paul argues that it would be best to allow themselves to be defrauded. Instead, the Corinthians are willing to step on their brothers in Christ to get what they feel are their rights. This raises the issue as to whether greed is not still in their hearts (1 Cor 6:9-11). While Paul accepts people who formerly did all sorts of evil (for Jesus has cleansed them), he makes it very clear that anyone presently practicing greed or immorality is not part of the kingdom, whatever their doctrinal commitments may be.<\/p>\n<p>The final issue in this section is that of casual sexual intercourse (6:12-20). In a world where virginity was important if a woman wished to be married and where slaves in the temple of Aphrodite were available as prostitutes, prostitution was the major form of casual sex. The libertine party used two slogans: “All things are lawful for me,” a saying that may well have been derived from Paul’s teaching, and “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”—that is, since the body works this way, it must be the Creator’s purpose. Paul qualifies rather than contradicts their slogans. Freedom is subordinate to other goals (6:12, 20). The body is not made to be used as we wish, but is to be dedicated to the Lord, as the doctrine of the resurrection demonstrates (vv 13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, sexual intercourse is an act of the whole person, unlike eating (Paul cites Gn 2:24; cf. Jesus in Mt 19:5). Therefore, this act takes a member (i.e., the person) from the body of Christ and makes him a unity with a prostitute (1 Cor 6:15-17). Thus immorality is unlike other sins that are external to the self, for it changes the self and thus defiles the body, the place where the Holy Spirit dwells. It disregards the fact that Christ has redeemed the body, and that the whole of the Christian belongs to God, not to the Christian.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Answers to the Corinthians, 7:1–16:4<\/h5>\n<p>Now Paul turns to the Corinthians’ own issues, building on the answers he has already given to questions they did not ask.<\/p>\n<p>The first issue is that of marriage (7:1-24). The slogan of the ascetic party in Corinth (perhaps a reaction against the libertines of ch 6) was “It is good for a man not to touch a woman” (7:1, <span>kjv<\/span>). The Corinthians applied this slogan to both married and unmarried, arguing that married Christians should abstain from sexual relations. Paul clarified the matter with three points. First, he said that this was totally unrealistic, for total abstinence would lead to immorality (vv 2, 7-9). Second, when people get married they no longer own their own bodies; their bodies belong to each other for their mutual benefit (vv 3-4). Sexual refusal denies a spouse what rightly belongs to him or her. Third, abstinence is allowed for limited periods by mutual agreement as a type of fast to help focus on Christ (v 5).<\/p>\n<p>While Paul will address the issue of the unmarried more fully in 7:25-40, in a side remark he indicates that he is himself content to be unmarried. But since some do not have this gift, full sexual expression in marriage is far better than fighting passion (7:7-9). Once two Christians are married, divorce is unthinkable. A clear word of Christ proves this (Mt 5:31-32; Mk 10:11-12; Lk 16:18 and parallels), so there are no exceptions (Paul either does not know of the exception clause in Mt 19:9 or he understands it as referring to something like premarital unchastity discovered before the wedding, not to adultery after the wedding). Although in some cases a Christian couple must live separately, it is always with a view to reconciliation. The teaching of Jesus does not allow him to think of the marriage as ending (1 Cor 7:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>But what if the spouse is not a Christian? Paul applies his principles to a situation for which Jesus did not leave a clear word. First, since Jesus told Christians not to divorce, even in this situation the Christian may not initiate a divorce (7:12-13). Second, since Christians are not to control or judge non-Christians (6:12-13), the Christian does not need to continue the relationship if the non-Christian insists on a divorce (7:15). Third, far from defiling the Christian (as the relationship in 6:15 does), the Christian will make the relationship holy, with positive results for the children and the possible salvation of the spouse (7:14, 16). While this is no call to remain in situations of physical or sexual abuse, it is a call to remain faithful to a mixed marriage situation.<\/p>\n<p>Paul does not believe that one normally needs to change one’s life situation to serve Christ (7:17-24). Therefore, normally each person should remain in that state of life in which he or she was when called to Christ. Paul’s examples show that he was thinking in terms of marriage or singleness, Jew (circumcision) or Gentile, slave or free, not in terms of situations that might be immoral in themselves. In the case of slaves, they can accept freedom if it becomes available, but it does not make an essential difference in their real state before God or their ability to serve Christ (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The second issue is that of the unmarried (7:25-40). Paul argues that single people and widows may marry—it is not wrong. Yet he advises them to remain single. Since all in this age is passing away, it would be good to stay single so as to avoid the extra suffering to which marriage exposes a person (vv 25-31). What is more, marriage always divides one’s attention between the Lord and the legitimate needs of the spouse. One must not abandon the spouse or ignore his or her needs in order to serve the Lord, but one can remain single so that the Lord can be the sole focus of life and devotion (vv 32-35). Finally, if one is in a situation in which marriage is expected, the person must make his own decision as to whether he should marry the woman for her sake (and perhaps that of the wider family) or whether he can and should simply care for her as a single person (vv 36-38). Paul closes this section by repeating his general principles (vv 39-40).<\/p>\n<p>The third issue Paul deals with is that of food that has been offered to idols (8:1–11:1). Most meat that was available in the marketplace came either from animals slaughtered as sacrifices in the temples or from groups of animals from which one was offered as a dedicatory sacrifice. To scrupulous Jews, all of this meat would be untouched. Furthermore, pagans invited Christians to feasts in their homes and to private feasts held in the precincts of pagan temples, where trade guilds also held feasts. Paul discusses these issues and uses them to teach wider principles of Christian conduct.<\/p>\n<p>First, love, not knowledge, is the key to correct behavior (8:1-13). Some Corinthians felt superior because they were convinced that idols had no reality (there is only one God), and therefore any food offered to them was still fit to eat. Paul again accepts their slogans, but counters with the statement, “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up” (v 1, <span>niv<\/span>). God is not concerned with what we know or eat, but he is concerned with whether or not we love our fellow Christians. The concern is not that a fellow Christian might become enraged because one indulged, but that he or she might have a vulnerable conscience and indulge himself, even though he believed it wrong and thus in his own eyes apostasizes from the faith (i.e., rebels against Christ). Such leading astray is not love. It would be better never to eat meat than to lead a fellow Christian into sin.<\/p>\n<p>Second, he points out that one should subordinate one’s own interests to those of others, especially those of Christ and his gospel (9:1-23). Both the examples of the apostles, who expected the church to support them and their families (cf. Lk 10:5-7), and Scripture prove that Paul had the right to demand support from the Corinthians. This had not been his practice, for he had normally made tents to support his ministry, though he did accept gifts from other churches. Paul did this to prevent people from thinking he was peddling religion for profit (9:12) and for the personal satisfaction of doing more than he had to do (vv 16-17). This was part of Paul’s larger policy of subordinating his own personal preferences and interests to those of Christ and his gospel (vv 19-23).<\/p>\n<p>Third, the bravado of the strong who demonstrate their liberty with disregard of fellow Christians is spiritually dangerous (9:24–10:22). It is not who begins but who completes the Christian life that counts; therefore, it is a life of discipline, not relaxed license (9:24-27). Israel in the wilderness presents an example of failure in this regard. They had “baptism” and “the Lord’s Supper” (10:2-4), just like the church, yet most of them did not make it to the Promised Land. The reason God destroyed them was simple: they turned to sin. Likewise, the Christian has to be careful not to be so proud about faith and freedom that he becomes careless about sin and falls from the faith (v 12). On the other hand, Christians need not be fearful, for the temptation is not more powerful than they are; God has provided a way of escape, if they will take it (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>Another link between the Israelites and the Corinthians pertains to partaking of a sacrificial meal (10:14-22). In the Lord’s Supper there is a sharing of the blood and body of Christ, just as real as Israel’s sacrifices on the altar. Food offered to idols is also a sharing, not with the supposed god, but with the real demon that is behind the idol. To try to share at both tables is to provoke God’s jealousy just as Israel did (v 22).<\/p>\n<p>A summary of the discussion draws the three chapters together (10:23–11:1). Since the food is not changed by being offered to idols, and since all food really belongs to God, one may eat anything sold in the market—do not ask any questions (10:25-26). Likewise, the Christian may eat anything served at a dinner in the home of an unbeliever. However, if someone points out that the food was offered to idols, the Christian should pass it by, not because it would hurt him, but because it is an issue with the person who raised the question, and the Christian is concerned about the good of his neighbor (vv 27-30). In other words, follow Paul’s example as he patterns himself in turn after Christ, who served others rather than himself. Act so that God’s reputation and character shine through even in what one eats (v 31); try to offend no one but to benefit each person in moving him toward salvation (v 32).<\/p>\n<p>The fourth issue Paul deals with is that of order in church meetings (11:2–14:40). The Corinthians’ house churches had lively meetings, but rather than showing unity in Christ, they demonstrated selfishness. Paul had no desire to change what they did; he did want to change how they did it.<\/p>\n<p>The first problem in the meetings was the behavior of married women (11:1-16). The sign of marriage in that day was the wearing of a veil or distinctive hairstyle, as a ring is today. Women praying and delivering prophecies in church was no issue for Paul, but the women may have felt that this loosed them from their husbands (cf. Mk 12:25) and therefore was a reason to set aside their veils. Paul argues that husband and wife are intimately joined, just as humans are to God (1 Cor 11:3). Therefore as humans should not shame but glorify God, so the wife should act toward her husband. Thus, while Paul approves of ministry by women, he puts marriage first.<\/p>\n<p>The second problem in the meetings was that of making class distinctions (11:17-34). Until the weekly Lord’s Supper began to be turned into the sacrifice of the Mass in the third and fourth centuries, it was a full shared meal. Middle- and upper-class Christians could come earlier to the church gatherings and also provide better food and drink for themselves. Following the customs of pagan clubs, they had no scruples against starting early and feasting as befit their class, so long as at least simple food was provided for the slaves and peasants who could not come as early (v 21). This shamed the poorer Christians and made them feel class distinctions keenly (v 22). This, argues Paul, is not the Lord’s Supper but a sham (v 20).<\/p>\n<p>Paul repeats the words of institution to point out that they all are participating in Christ’s body and blood (cf. 10:16-17), not their own meal. To do it in an unworthy manner, with divisions and class distinctions among them, is to profane his meal by failing to demonstrate the unity of his body, the church (11:29), and thus invite his judgment, which they were already experiencing. Instead, they should examine their own motives and truly gather as one to eat this common meal.<\/p>\n<p>The third problem in their meetings was the use of spiritual gifts (12:1–14:40). It is possible that some people in these house churches, under the influence of Gnostic ideas in which the spiritual is good and the material evil, and feeling inspired by a spirit, cried out, “Jesus [meaning the human Jesus as opposed to the spiritual Christ] be cursed.” It is not the Spirit of God saying this, argues Paul, for the Spirit in us cries the basic Christian confession, “Jesus is Lord.”<\/p>\n<p>Others in these churches were exalting their own particular gift, especially the gift of tongues, shouting down others or refusing to give them a turn. There is only one Spirit and he gives all the gifts, Paul argues (12:4-6). The Spirit manifests himself sovereignly in each Christian, not simply for the Christian’s own benefit, but for the good of all (v 7). Since it is the Spirit, not a given manifestation, that the Christian has, the gifts manifested could change from meeting to meeting.<\/p>\n<p>That same Spirit has made all Christians into one organic unity in Christ (12:12-13). Thus not only does the one Spirit give all the gifts—all are equally inspired—but all the gifts are equally needed for the proper functioning of the body of Christ (vv 14-26). No one can say that his lack of a given gift makes him less a part of the body; indeed, the less noticeable gifts may well be the more important. Thus, within the body of Christ, there are not only different manifestations of the Spirit through individuals in a given meeting, but different ministries or functions of individuals in the body (vv 27-31).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, it is not the demonstration of a particular gift that shows one’s spirituality, but how one demonstrates it—that is, whether one manifests it with love (13:1-13). Any gift exercised for selfish purposes may be a genuine gift of the Spirit, but it is worthless to the individual (vv 1-3). This is because love is the opposite of selfishness (vv 4-7). In fact, the gifts of the Spirit are only for the period between Jesus’ first coming and his second coming, when the kingdom of God will be perfectly revealed and the King will be present in person, and thus the intermediary gifts of the Spirit will be no longer necessary (vv 10, 12). It is not giftedness but faith and hope that will have a reward then, and love, which is the greatest, because it will continue as Christians live in perfect love with each other and with Jesus (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>Applying this to Corinth, Paul argues that while one should desire all the gifts, love dictates that prophecy should be the gift of choice in the church meetings (14:1-25). The Corinthians had evidently been stressing tongues. Tongues without interpretation is of little value to anyone except to the speaker himself. It does not build anyone up; its confusion seems madness to outsiders. Outside the church meetings there is a role for tongues, both as a sign of judgment (v 21) and for private devotion (v 18), but inside, only with interpretation. Prophecy, however, both builds up and convicts, and thus is to be sought in the meetings.<\/p>\n<p>In the church meetings, then, both gifts and order are to prevail (14:26-40). All types of gifts are allowed expression with a goal of mutual edification, not selfish demonstration (v 26). Tongues speakers must have an interpreter; both they and prophets must speak in turn, with time being taken to evaluate the utterances after every few speakers (vv 27-33). Furthermore, the women, who were perhaps chatting in the service (perhaps due to habits learned in Jewish synagogues, where they were segregated and did not participate) are to cease their chattering, pay attention, and learn, asking questions at home if they do not understand (vv 34-36). In his concluding summary, Paul states that all should be done in an orderly manner (vv 37-40).<\/p>\n<p>The fifth issue Paul deals with is that of the resurrection of the dead (ch 15). Some of the problems mentioned earlier concerning loose morals (chs 5–6), ascetic denial, sexuality (ch 7), or feeling one was resurrected already (ch 11) point to the fact that some Corinthians did not believe in the resurrection of the body, though they apparently believed in the resurrection of Jesus and the immortality of the human soul.<\/p>\n<p>Paul reaffirms that the resurrection of Jesus is an essential part of the gospel message (15:1-19). The unified voice of the church was that Jesus not only died but rose again and appeared to numerous witnesses (vv 3-11). If they were consistent in their antiresurrection argument, Christ could not have been raised. Yet if this were the case, the whole gospel message is false and all their hopes for salvation are in vain (vv 12-19).<\/p>\n<p>Since Christ has been raised, Christians will also be raised because of their solidarity with him (15:20-28). As they had experienced the results of being in Adam, so now they will experience the results of being in Christ. But resurrection does not happen at once. There are progressive stages: (a) Christ was first; (b) Christians will be raised at his coming; (c) Christ must reign until he extends kingdom rule over the whole world, destroying all demonic powers (including death itself); and (d) then he will turn over the perfected kingdom to the Father (vv 23-28).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection hope also explains Christian practices such as baptizing people on behalf of others who had died (probably people who had turned to Christ but had died before they could be baptized, 15:29), and willingness to risk death for Christ (vv 30-32).<\/p>\n<p>Paul admits that there are intellectual problems involved, but these are solved when one realizes that resurrection includes both continuity and discontinuity (15:35-50). Just as seed and plant are the same and yet different, and just as many types of bodies exist, so it is with the resurrection. What was perishable, dishonorable, weak, and physical (i.e., in Adam) will be raised imperishable, glorious, powerful, and spiritual (i.e., in Christ). Indeed, it is only as Christians thus become like Christ, the heavenly man, that they can become part of God’s kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>With excitement Paul shares his real hope, that of transformation (15:51-58). At the coming of Christ the dead will be raised and transformed. But the living will also need transformation, and this will happen in a split second, making all of them impervious to death. Then they will truly know the victory already present in Jesus’ resurrection (vv 54-57). A concluding summary draws the practical conclusion that this teaching should give them assurance of a reward for anything done for Christ now (v 58).<\/p>\n<p>The sixth issue Paul deals with is that of the collection for the needy Jerusalem church (16:1-4). Because of famine in Judea in the 40s, the church there had become impoverished. Partly because of the need and partly to further the unity of the church, Paul took up a collection in some of his churches for the Judean church. He answers the Corinthians’ practical queries by stating that the collection should be made weekly according to ability, not all at once when Paul arrives (16:2). When he comes, he will send off the money with their own messengers. Paul remains vague about whether or not he will accompany them, allaying suspicions that somehow he plans to profit from it (cf. 2 Cor 8–9).<\/p>\n<h5>Final Remarks and Closing, 16:5-24<\/h5>\n<p>Having come to the end, Paul discusses his travel plans, including his intention for a lengthy visit whenever he leaves Ephesus (cf. 2 Cor 1). Timothy was either coming with the letter or else would arrive shortly after another mission; they were to respect him and help him return. Paul points out that he urged Apollos to visit Corinth, in case some suspect Paul is against him. A closing formal exhortation to firm faith and love leads into his final customary greetings. He praises the Corinthian messengers who had brought him their letter (16:15-18) and sends greetings from Aquila and Prisca (Priscilla), his comissionaries who had helped him found the church in Corinth (Acts 18:2-3, 18). Referring to the customary greeting in the church, he tells them to greet each other with a kiss on each cheek (16:20). Paul then takes the pen from the scribe, as was normal, and writes the closing exhortation—placing a curse on those who do not love Jesus, the common Aramaic expression used in the church “Come, O Lord” (<em>Marana tha,<\/em> perhaps used to close services), and providing an assurance of his own love for them (vv 21-24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Corinth; Corinthians, Second Letter to the; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CORINTHIANS, First Letter to the<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Origin<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt about who wrote 1 Corinthians, for all scholars agree that the apostle Paul wrote it on his third missionary journey while he was living in Ephesus. By this time Paul was a mature, middle-aged (perhaps 55 years old) missionary, fully seasoned from planting churches around a quarter of the Mediterranean world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandOrigin\">Date and Origin<\/p>\n<p>Paul worked in Corinth from about <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 52. After a brief stay in Jerusalem, he returned to his missionary work, this time at Ephesus (Acts 19), where he ministered for three years (<span>AD<\/span> 53–55\/56). During this period, he wrote at least three letters to Corinth and made a visit as well. His first letter, often called “the previous letter,” is referred to in 1 Corinthians 5:9-11. We know from this reference that the letter was misunderstood, but we know little of its content, for it has been lost.<\/p>\n<p>Sometime in <span>AD<\/span> 55, after hearing reports from Chloe’s household (1 Cor 1:11), who were probably members of Chloe’s house church, he dictated a second letter to Corinth, our 1 Corinthians. This was probably sent off in the hands of Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (16:17). Paul would later write a third letter to Corinth, called “the letter of tears” (2 Cor 2:2-3), and then finally 2 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Corinth was a seaport city, destroyed by the Romans in 146 <span>BC<\/span> and rebuilt in 46 <span>BC<\/span> by Julius Caesar. After 27 <span>BC<\/span>, it was the Roman capital of Achaia, where the proconsul had his residence (Acts 18:12). The city itself was really three cities: the port of Cenchrea, about eight miles (13 kilometers) to the east, where ships from the Aegean would unload; the port of Lechaion, about a mile (1.6 kilometers) to the west on the Gulf of Corinth, where the ships would be reloaded, their goods having been transported in wagons over the isthmus and the ships on rollers; and the city itself on the high ground in between.<\/p>\n<p>The acropolis of the city, on top of the steep, high Acrocorinth, contained the temple of Aphrodite, where 1,000 female slaves were dedicated to the service of this goddess of love. This distinctive cult of Corinth was dedicated to the veneration of Aphrodite, goddess of love, beauty, and fertility, who is identified with the Roman Venus. Associated with such religious practices was a general moral degradation. Corinthian morals were notoriously corrupt, even when compared with pagan Rome. Down in the city was the synagogue (Acts 18:4); for while the city as a Roman colony was largely populated by Italians, it had attracted other peoples from the Mediterranean, among whom were the Jews.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTeaching\">Purpose and Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The main concern of Paul in 1 Corinthians was the unity of the church. There was a self-centeredness in Corinth that resulted in building cliques within the church, in flaunting knowledge and liberty in the face of others scandalized by it, and in selfish displays in the worship services.<\/p>\n<p>Two other major concerns also surface in the book. First, along with other pagan practices, the lax sexual ethics of Corinth had influenced the church; Paul needed to erect some barriers. Second, there was a problem in accepting the resurrection of the body; Paul realized that this issue had implications for the core of the faith and vigorously affirmed the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>Both of these latter two areas, as well as aspects of the unity issue (particularly their concern with knowledge), have been identified by some scholars as Gnostic motifs, leading to the conclusion that Paul was opposing a Gnostic party in Corinth. Careful examination reveals, however, that while some of the elements floating in the Corinthian milieu would later contribute to the development of Gnosticism, it would be anachronistic to call them gnostic. While recognizing protognostic ideas in the Corinthian situation, it is important to keep interpretation within the first-century context.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the focus of Paul’s concern was the church, its unity and purity. Paul was fighting to keep this church from disintegrating into a number of competing and bickering factions divided over moral and doctrinal issues. Furthermore, he wanted to keep the focus of the church on Jesus, the exalted Lord.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Greeting, 1:1-9<\/h5>\n<p>Paul begins with a standard greeting, followed by his usual thanksgiving prayer. Two features stand out. First, the greeting associates Sosthenes with Paul. While we cannot be sure who Sosthenes was, he was surely well known to the Corinthians; probably he was the Sosthenes whom Acts 18:17 identifies as the ruler of the synagogue, following the conversion of Crispus.<\/p>\n<p>Second, Paul stresses the Corinthians’ abilities in speech, knowledge, and spiritual gifts. They had all of these, and these were genuine, but it was precisely these good things that they were abusing. Paul’s solution is not to suppress these gifts (indeed, he thanks God for them), but to place them in a new context.<\/p>\n<h5>Report from Chloe’s People, 1:10–4:21<\/h5>\n<p>The Corinthians had made Paul, Cephas (Peter), Apollos, and even Christ into party leaders. We are not sure what each of these groups stood for, but one might guess that the Pauline group stressed Paul’s slogans of liberty; the Petrine group, the need to hold to Jewish practices; and the Apollos group, the value of philosophical understanding and oratory. Whatever they stood for, Paul is appalled that it breaks their unity. His first response is to argue that his behavior was not calculated to build a following but to point to Christ. That is, he did not insist on personally baptizing converts; who performed these acts did not matter, since they were all baptized into Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Paul immediately moves to the underlying issue, that of various persons wanting to show themselves better or wiser than others who did not have the insights of their party in the church. Their seeking for wisdom contradicts Paul’s preaching of the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>First, the message of a crucified Christ (1:18) made no sense within the wisdom and values of either Jews or Greeks. It demanded a whole new way of looking on life—God’s way.<\/p>\n<p>Second, God had not chosen them on the basis of their status in society; quite the contrary, he had made their only status the equal status they received from him (1:26-31).<\/p>\n<p>Third, their faith had not been based on Paul’s oratory but on the gifts of the Spirit that Paul had manifested (2:4), which had convinced them that God was acting in Paul. Thus, it was not argument that led them to God, but God’s Spirit. Therefore it was the Spirit, not human reasoning, that would continue to reveal God to them. Unless they became fools with respect to the world’s ways of reasoning, they would never be able to rethink life from the perspective of the Spirit, who gives true wisdom.<\/p>\n<p>Fourth, they were not acting on this spiritual level when they claimed Paul and others as party leaders; this activity demonstrates the evil impulse in human beings (“the flesh” or “fallen human nature”) at work since it elevates human servants rather than the God who works equally in each of them.<\/p>\n<p>Fifth, these servants were working together to build one “temple” for God based on the one foundation in Jesus Christ, that is, the church. God alone will judge how each Christian contributes to the work of building the church. But woe to the person who divides the church, for “if anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him” (3:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). (Note that here the temple imagery is used collectively; the church is the temple. In chapter 6 it will be used individually; each Christian is the temple.)<\/p>\n<p>Finally, he points to their overrealized eschatology, for with their spiritual gifts (which were genuine) and vaunted wisdom (which was worldly) they claimed they were reigning with Christ (4:8-13). Paul, with ironic sarcasm, points out how different this claim is from the lifestyle of the apostles. The apostles lived like Jesus—a life of suffering, expecting exaltation later. The Corinthians were trying to have their exaltation now without crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Paul closes this section with an admonition. He softens his words toward some who would be responsive, urging them to copy his lifestyle. The teacher was the message (vv 14-16). Timothy will also faithfully live the truth before them. Then he threatens the “arrogant” (v 18), pointing out that he will not challenge their words but their spiritual power if he comes.<\/p>\n<h5>The Report from the Corinthian Messengers, 5:1–6:20<\/h5>\n<p>Paul now turns to three issues raised by oral reports from the messengers bearing the Corinthians’ letter to him.<\/p>\n<p>The first issue is that of church discipline (5:12-13). Paul cites a case of flagrant immorality—that of incest. This immorality was so clear (even pagans considered it immoral), that it was not a case of ignorance of Christian principles. Further, the church had taken no action but rather boasted in its tolerance, perhaps on the basis of a misunderstanding of Paul’s teaching on freedom from the law.<\/p>\n<p>Paul presents three principles in this section: (1) the primary goal of church discipline is the repentance and restoration of the offender; (2) the secondary goal of church discipline is the protection of the church (5:6-8); and (3) the church is not to seek to judge or control the actions of evil persons in the world—they are God’s responsibility—but to discipline those within the church (vv 9-13). Paul will use these principles also in the following chapters (cf. 7:12-16).<\/p>\n<p>The second issue is that of lawsuits between Christians (6:1-11). The Corinthian society was as prone to litigation as our own, and Christians did not see anything wrong in suing each other. Paul was troubled. If Christians are to judge the world, they certainly should not bring the world in to judge issues within the church. Rather than put their cases before “those who are least esteemed by the church” (6:4, <span>rsv<\/span>, i.e., pagan judges), they should decide the cases within the church.<\/p>\n<p>Paul has an even better way than bypassing the pagan courts, and that is to simply suffer the wrong (1 Cor 6:7). Applying the teaching of Jesus quite literally (Mt 5:38-42), Paul argues that it would be best to allow themselves to be defrauded. Instead, the Corinthians are willing to step on their brothers in Christ to get what they feel are their rights. This raises the issue as to whether greed is not still in their hearts (1 Cor 6:9-11). While Paul accepts people who formerly did all sorts of evil (for Jesus has cleansed them), he makes it very clear that anyone presently practicing greed or immorality is not part of the kingdom, whatever their doctrinal commitments may be.<\/p>\n<p>The final issue in this section is that of casual sexual intercourse (6:12-20). In a world where virginity was important if a woman wished to be married and where slaves in the temple of Aphrodite were available as prostitutes, prostitution was the major form of casual sex. The libertine party used two slogans: “All things are lawful for me,” a saying that may well have been derived from Paul’s teaching, and “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”—that is, since the body works this way, it must be the Creator’s purpose. Paul qualifies rather than contradicts their slogans. Freedom is subordinate to other goals (6:12, 20). The body is not made to be used as we wish, but is to be dedicated to the Lord, as the doctrine of the resurrection demonstrates (vv 13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, sexual intercourse is an act of the whole person, unlike eating (Paul cites Gn 2:24; cf. Jesus in Mt 19:5). Therefore, this act takes a member (i.e., the person) from the body of Christ and makes him a unity with a prostitute (1 Cor 6:15-17). Thus immorality is unlike other sins that are external to the self, for it changes the self and thus defiles the body, the place where the Holy Spirit dwells. It disregards the fact that Christ has redeemed the body, and that the whole of the Christian belongs to God, not to the Christian.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Answers to the Corinthians, 7:1–16:4<\/h5>\n<p>Now Paul turns to the Corinthians’ own issues, building on the answers he has already given to questions they did not ask.<\/p>\n<p>The first issue is that of marriage (7:1-24). The slogan of the ascetic party in Corinth (perhaps a reaction against the libertines of ch 6) was “It is good for a man not to touch a woman” (7:1, <span>kjv<\/span>). The Corinthians applied this slogan to both married and unmarried, arguing that married Christians should abstain from sexual relations. Paul clarified the matter with three points. First, he said that this was totally unrealistic, for total abstinence would lead to immorality (vv 2, 7-9). Second, when people get married they no longer own their own bodies; their bodies belong to each other for their mutual benefit (vv 3-4). Sexual refusal denies a spouse what rightly belongs to him or her. Third, abstinence is allowed for limited periods by mutual agreement as a type of fast to help focus on Christ (v 5).<\/p>\n<p>While Paul will address the issue of the unmarried more fully in 7:25-40, in a side remark he indicates that he is himself content to be unmarried. But since some do not have this gift, full sexual expression in marriage is far better than fighting passion (7:7-9). Once two Christians are married, divorce is unthinkable. A clear word of Christ proves this (Mt 5:31-32; Mk 10:11-12; Lk 16:18 and parallels), so there are no exceptions (Paul either does not know of the exception clause in Mt 19:9 or he understands it as referring to something like premarital unchastity discovered before the wedding, not to adultery after the wedding). Although in some cases a Christian couple must live separately, it is always with a view to reconciliation. The teaching of Jesus does not allow him to think of the marriage as ending (1 Cor 7:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>But what if the spouse is not a Christian? Paul applies his principles to a situation for which Jesus did not leave a clear word. First, since Jesus told Christians not to divorce, even in this situation the Christian may not initiate a divorce (7:12-13). Second, since Christians are not to control or judge non-Christians (6:12-13), the Christian does not need to continue the relationship if the non-Christian insists on a divorce (7:15). Third, far from defiling the Christian (as the relationship in 6:15 does), the Christian will make the relationship holy, with positive results for the children and the possible salvation of the spouse (7:14, 16). While this is no call to remain in situations of physical or sexual abuse, it is a call to remain faithful to a mixed marriage situation.<\/p>\n<p>Paul does not believe that one normally needs to change one’s life situation to serve Christ (7:17-24). Therefore, normally each person should remain in that state of life in which he or she was when called to Christ. Paul’s examples show that he was thinking in terms of marriage or singleness, Jew (circumcision) or Gentile, slave or free, not in terms of situations that might be immoral in themselves. In the case of slaves, they can accept freedom if it becomes available, but it does not make an essential difference in their real state before God or their ability to serve Christ (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The second issue is that of the unmarried (7:25-40). Paul argues that single people and widows may marry—it is not wrong. Yet he advises them to remain single. Since all in this age is passing away, it would be good to stay single so as to avoid the extra suffering to which marriage exposes a person (vv 25-31). What is more, marriage always divides one’s attention between the Lord and the legitimate needs of the spouse. One must not abandon the spouse or ignore his or her needs in order to serve the Lord, but one can remain single so that the Lord can be the sole focus of life and devotion (vv 32-35). Finally, if one is in a situation in which marriage is expected, the person must make his own decision as to whether he should marry the woman for her sake (and perhaps that of the wider family) or whether he can and should simply care for her as a single person (vv 36-38). Paul closes this section by repeating his general principles (vv 39-40).<\/p>\n<p>The third issue Paul deals with is that of food that has been offered to idols (8:1–11:1). Most meat that was available in the marketplace came either from animals slaughtered as sacrifices in the temples or from groups of animals from which one was offered as a dedicatory sacrifice. To scrupulous Jews, all of this meat would be untouched. Furthermore, pagans invited Christians to feasts in their homes and to private feasts held in the precincts of pagan temples, where trade guilds also held feasts. Paul discusses these issues and uses them to teach wider principles of Christian conduct.<\/p>\n<p>First, love, not knowledge, is the key to correct behavior (8:1-13). Some Corinthians felt superior because they were convinced that idols had no reality (there is only one God), and therefore any food offered to them was still fit to eat. Paul again accepts their slogans, but counters with the statement, “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up” (v 1, <span>niv<\/span>). God is not concerned with what we know or eat, but he is concerned with whether or not we love our fellow Christians. The concern is not that a fellow Christian might become enraged because one indulged, but that he or she might have a vulnerable conscience and indulge himself, even though he believed it wrong and thus in his own eyes apostasizes from the faith (i.e., rebels against Christ). Such leading astray is not love. It would be better never to eat meat than to lead a fellow Christian into sin.<\/p>\n<p>Second, he points out that one should subordinate one’s own interests to those of others, especially those of Christ and his gospel (9:1-23). Both the examples of the apostles, who expected the church to support them and their families (cf. Lk 10:5-7), and Scripture prove that Paul had the right to demand support from the Corinthians. This had not been his practice, for he had normally made tents to support his ministry, though he did accept gifts from other churches. Paul did this to prevent people from thinking he was peddling religion for profit (9:12) and for the personal satisfaction of doing more than he had to do (vv 16-17). This was part of Paul’s larger policy of subordinating his own personal preferences and interests to those of Christ and his gospel (vv 19-23).<\/p>\n<p>Third, the bravado of the strong who demonstrate their liberty with disregard of fellow Christians is spiritually dangerous (9:24–10:22). It is not who begins but who completes the Christian life that counts; therefore, it is a life of discipline, not relaxed license (9:24-27). Israel in the wilderness presents an example of failure in this regard. They had “baptism” and “the Lord’s Supper” (10:2-4), just like the church, yet most of them did not make it to the Promised Land. The reason God destroyed them was simple: they turned to sin. Likewise, the Christian has to be careful not to be so proud about faith and freedom that he becomes careless about sin and falls from the faith (v 12). On the other hand, Christians need not be fearful, for the temptation is not more powerful than they are; God has provided a way of escape, if they will take it (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>Another link between the Israelites and the Corinthians pertains to partaking of a sacrificial meal (10:14-22). In the Lord’s Supper there is a sharing of the blood and body of Christ, just as real as Israel’s sacrifices on the altar. Food offered to idols is also a sharing, not with the supposed god, but with the real demon that is behind the idol. To try to share at both tables is to provoke God’s jealousy just as Israel did (v 22).<\/p>\n<p>A summary of the discussion draws the three chapters together (10:23–11:1). Since the food is not changed by being offered to idols, and since all food really belongs to God, one may eat anything sold in the market—do not ask any questions (10:25-26). Likewise, the Christian may eat anything served at a dinner in the home of an unbeliever. However, if someone points out that the food was offered to idols, the Christian should pass it by, not because it would hurt him, but because it is an issue with the person who raised the question, and the Christian is concerned about the good of his neighbor (vv 27-30). In other words, follow Paul’s example as he patterns himself in turn after Christ, who served others rather than himself. Act so that God’s reputation and character shine through even in what one eats (v 31); try to offend no one but to benefit each person in moving him toward salvation (v 32).<\/p>\n<p>The fourth issue Paul deals with is that of order in church meetings (11:2–14:40). The Corinthians’ house churches had lively meetings, but rather than showing unity in Christ, they demonstrated selfishness. Paul had no desire to change what they did; he did want to change how they did it.<\/p>\n<p>The first problem in the meetings was the behavior of married women (11:1-16). The sign of marriage in that day was the wearing of a veil or distinctive hairstyle, as a ring is today. Women praying and delivering prophecies in church was no issue for Paul, but the women may have felt that this loosed them from their husbands (cf. Mk 12:25) and therefore was a reason to set aside their veils. Paul argues that husband and wife are intimately joined, just as humans are to God (1 Cor 11:3). Therefore as humans should not shame but glorify God, so the wife should act toward her husband. Thus, while Paul approves of ministry by women, he puts marriage first.<\/p>\n<p>The second problem in the meetings was that of making class distinctions (11:17-34). Until the weekly Lord’s Supper began to be turned into the sacrifice of the Mass in the third and fourth centuries, it was a full shared meal. Middle- and upper-class Christians could come earlier to the church gatherings and also provide better food and drink for themselves. Following the customs of pagan clubs, they had no scruples against starting early and feasting as befit their class, so long as at least simple food was provided for the slaves and peasants who could not come as early (v 21). This shamed the poorer Christians and made them feel class distinctions keenly (v 22). This, argues Paul, is not the Lord’s Supper but a sham (v 20).<\/p>\n<p>Paul repeats the words of institution to point out that they all are participating in Christ’s body and blood (cf. 10:16-17), not their own meal. To do it in an unworthy manner, with divisions and class distinctions among them, is to profane his meal by failing to demonstrate the unity of his body, the church (11:29), and thus invite his judgment, which they were already experiencing. Instead, they should examine their own motives and truly gather as one to eat this common meal.<\/p>\n<p>The third problem in their meetings was the use of spiritual gifts (12:1–14:40). It is possible that some people in these house churches, under the influence of Gnostic ideas in which the spiritual is good and the material evil, and feeling inspired by a spirit, cried out, “Jesus [meaning the human Jesus as opposed to the spiritual Christ] be cursed.” It is not the Spirit of God saying this, argues Paul, for the Spirit in us cries the basic Christian confession, “Jesus is Lord.”<\/p>\n<p>Others in these churches were exalting their own particular gift, especially the gift of tongues, shouting down others or refusing to give them a turn. There is only one Spirit and he gives all the gifts, Paul argues (12:4-6). The Spirit manifests himself sovereignly in each Christian, not simply for the Christian’s own benefit, but for the good of all (v 7). Since it is the Spirit, not a given manifestation, that the Christian has, the gifts manifested could change from meeting to meeting.<\/p>\n<p>That same Spirit has made all Christians into one organic unity in Christ (12:12-13). Thus not only does the one Spirit give all the gifts—all are equally inspired—but all the gifts are equally needed for the proper functioning of the body of Christ (vv 14-26). No one can say that his lack of a given gift makes him less a part of the body; indeed, the less noticeable gifts may well be the more important. Thus, within the body of Christ, there are not only different manifestations of the Spirit through individuals in a given meeting, but different ministries or functions of individuals in the body (vv 27-31).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, it is not the demonstration of a particular gift that shows one’s spirituality, but how one demonstrates it—that is, whether one manifests it with love (13:1-13). Any gift exercised for selfish purposes may be a genuine gift of the Spirit, but it is worthless to the individual (vv 1-3). This is because love is the opposite of selfishness (vv 4-7). In fact, the gifts of the Spirit are only for the period between Jesus’ first coming and his second coming, when the kingdom of God will be perfectly revealed and the King will be present in person, and thus the intermediary gifts of the Spirit will be no longer necessary (vv 10, 12). It is not giftedness but faith and hope that will have a reward then, and love, which is the greatest, because it will continue as Christians live in perfect love with each other and with Jesus (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>Applying this to Corinth, Paul argues that while one should desire all the gifts, love dictates that prophecy should be the gift of choice in the church meetings (14:1-25). The Corinthians had evidently been stressing tongues. Tongues without interpretation is of little value to anyone except to the speaker himself. It does not build anyone up; its confusion seems madness to outsiders. Outside the church meetings there is a role for tongues, both as a sign of judgment (v 21) and for private devotion (v 18), but inside, only with interpretation. Prophecy, however, both builds up and convicts, and thus is to be sought in the meetings.<\/p>\n<p>In the church meetings, then, both gifts and order are to prevail (14:26-40). All types of gifts are allowed expression with a goal of mutual edification, not selfish demonstration (v 26). Tongues speakers must have an interpreter; both they and prophets must speak in turn, with time being taken to evaluate the utterances after every few speakers (vv 27-33). Furthermore, the women, who were perhaps chatting in the service (perhaps due to habits learned in Jewish synagogues, where they were segregated and did not participate) are to cease their chattering, pay attention, and learn, asking questions at home if they do not understand (vv 34-36). In his concluding summary, Paul states that all should be done in an orderly manner (vv 37-40).<\/p>\n<p>The fifth issue Paul deals with is that of the resurrection of the dead (ch 15). Some of the problems mentioned earlier concerning loose morals (chs 5–6), ascetic denial, sexuality (ch 7), or feeling one was resurrected already (ch 11) point to the fact that some Corinthians did not believe in the resurrection of the body, though they apparently believed in the resurrection of Jesus and the immortality of the human soul.<\/p>\n<p>Paul reaffirms that the resurrection of Jesus is an essential part of the gospel message (15:1-19). The unified voice of the church was that Jesus not only died but rose again and appeared to numerous witnesses (vv 3-11). If they were consistent in their antiresurrection argument, Christ could not have been raised. Yet if this were the case, the whole gospel message is false and all their hopes for salvation are in vain (vv 12-19).<\/p>\n<p>Since Christ has been raised, Christians will also be raised because of their solidarity with him (15:20-28). As they had experienced the results of being in Adam, so now they will experience the results of being in Christ. But resurrection does not happen at once. There are progressive stages: (a) Christ was first; (b) Christians will be raised at his coming; (c) Christ must reign until he extends kingdom rule over the whole world, destroying all demonic powers (including death itself); and (d) then he will turn over the perfected kingdom to the Father (vv 23-28).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection hope also explains Christian practices such as baptizing people on behalf of others who had died (probably people who had turned to Christ but had died before they could be baptized, 15:29), and willingness to risk death for Christ (vv 30-32).<\/p>\n<p>Paul admits that there are intellectual problems involved, but these are solved when one realizes that resurrection includes both continuity and discontinuity (15:35-50). Just as seed and plant are the same and yet different, and just as many types of bodies exist, so it is with the resurrection. What was perishable, dishonorable, weak, and physical (i.e., in Adam) will be raised imperishable, glorious, powerful, and spiritual (i.e., in Christ). Indeed, it is only as Christians thus become like Christ, the heavenly man, that they can become part of God’s kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>With excitement Paul shares his real hope, that of transformation (15:51-58). At the coming of Christ the dead will be raised and transformed. But the living will also need transformation, and this will happen in a split second, making all of them impervious to death. Then they will truly know the victory already present in Jesus’ resurrection (vv 54-57). A concluding summary draws the practical conclusion that this teaching should give them assurance of a reward for anything done for Christ now (v 58).<\/p>\n<p>The sixth issue Paul deals with is that of the collection for the needy Jerusalem church (16:1-4). Because of famine in Judea in the 40s, the church there had become impoverished. Partly because of the need and partly to further the unity of the church, Paul took up a collection in some of his churches for the Judean church. He answers the Corinthians’ practical queries by stating that the collection should be made weekly according to ability, not all at once when Paul arrives (16:2). When he comes, he will send off the money with their own messengers. Paul remains vague about whether or not he will accompany them, allaying suspicions that somehow he plans to profit from it (cf. 2 Cor 8–9).<\/p>\n<h5>Final Remarks and Closing, 16:5-24<\/h5>\n<p>Having come to the end, Paul discusses his travel plans, including his intention for a lengthy visit whenever he leaves Ephesus (cf. 2 Cor 1). Timothy was either coming with the letter or else would arrive shortly after another mission; they were to respect him and help him return. Paul points out that he urged Apollos to visit Corinth, in case some suspect Paul is against him. A closing formal exhortation to firm faith and love leads into his final customary greetings. He praises the Corinthian messengers who had brought him their letter (16:15-18) and sends greetings from Aquila and Prisca (Priscilla), his comissionaries who had helped him found the church in Corinth (Acts 18:2-3, 18). Referring to the customary greeting in the church, he tells them to greet each other with a kiss on each cheek (16:20). Paul then takes the pen from the scribe, as was normal, and writes the closing exhortation—placing a curse on those who do not love Jesus, the common Aramaic expression used in the church “Come, O Lord” (<em>Marana tha,<\/em> perhaps used to close services), and providing an assurance of his own love for them (vv 21-24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Corinth; Corinthians, Second Letter to the; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CORINTHIANS, First Letter to the Preview • Author • Date and Origin • Background • Purpose and Teaching • Content Author There is no doubt about who wrote 1 Corinthians, for all scholars agree that the apostle Paul wrote it on his third missionary journey while he was living in Ephesus. By this time Paul was a mature, middle-aged (perhaps 55 years old) missionary, fully seasoned from planting churches around a quarter of the Mediterranean world. Date and Origin Paul worked in Corinth from abo...","summary_en":"CORINTHIANS, First Letter to the Preview • Author • Date and Origin • Background • Purpose and Teaching • Content Author There is no doubt about who wrote 1 Corinthians, for all scholars agree that the apostle Paul wrote it on his third missionary journey while he was living in Ephesus. By this time Paul was a mature, middle-aged (perhaps 55 years old) missionary, fully seasoned from planting churches around a quarter of the Mediterranean world. Date and Origin Paul worked in Corinth from abo...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16586,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Homes and Dwellings","title_en":"Homes and Dwellings","content_ro":"<h3>HOMES AND DWELLINGS<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Middle Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Late Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Houses of the Iron Age<\/p>\n<p>• Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiddleBronzeAgeHouses\">Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard.<\/p>\n<p>The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on one side, generally on the west of the courtyard, to avoid having the prevailing westerly winds blow smoke into the room. Silos for storing grain were normally in the room rather than in the courtyard. Good examples of such one-roomed houses were found at Tell Nagila, northwest of Beersheba, dating to about 1700 <span>BC<\/span>. Three such houses had a room 10 by 7 feet (3 by 2.1 meters) and a courtyard 10 by 16 feet (3 by 4.9 meters). Partitions sometimes divided the room. The walls were made of rough stone and mud bricks covered by mud plaster and were hardly thick enough to carry a second story. Houses were set close together to take advantage of a common back wall with entrances to the court on roughly parallel streets. Each house contained a stone and clay bench along the walls.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes several rooms were built off one side of the courtyard. The grandest of these yet found comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1600 <span>BC<\/span>, probably the house of a local governor or patrician. There were no less than six rooms on the western side of the courtyard, which was some 35 by 19 feet (10.7 by 5.8 meters) in size. The roofed living space, including both the ground and second floors, was about 1,500 square feet (139 square meters); a second floor is assumed from the thickness of the walls all around. The ground floor may have been multifunctional with two stable rooms and two storage areas. Other less imposing variants of the courtyard house with rooms on one side only come from this same tell in Stratum E (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The second type of house in the middle Bronze Age had a roofed hall with rooms on one or two sides. A good example of such a house with rooms on one side comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1800 <span>BC<\/span>. The large, roofed, rectangular hall contained three large, flat stones set along the long axis to serve as foundations for the wooden roof supports. Rafters of wood and a roof of reeds covered with mud were found in the debris. Each of the three rooms on the west was entered from the hall. The stone foundations and mud brick walls were substantial enough to support a second story that could be reached by an exterior wooden staircase or ladder. The floor of earth, ashes, and straw was carefully smoothed over.<\/p>\n<p>A third type of house consisted of an open courtyard with rooms on two adjacent sides of the court. A good example comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, built on the ruins of the house with the roofed hall. The roofed hall became the court. A house at Tell Taanach from the middle Bronze IIB period (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>) was of very strong construction with walls over three feet (.9 meter) thick laid in mortar. The courtyard contained a cistern, and an oven was found in a room on the east side of the house. The ground floors were plastered and covered 2,300 square feet (214 square meters). An interior staircase led to a second story.<\/p>\n<p>In some houses, rooms were placed at opposite sides of the courtyard. Good examples come from Beth Shemesh (Tell er-Rumeilah) and Megiddo. At Beth Shemesh the city wall formed the south wall of the house, and rooms lay east and west of the courtyard. Entrance was from the street into one of the rooms. The other rooms were entered by crossing the courtyard. The outer walls were over three feet (91.4 centimeters) thick and interior walls a foot and a half (45.7 centimeters) thick. Mud and lime plaster coated the walls.<\/p>\n<p>At Megiddo houses were built against the north city wall. In level XII (c. 1750–1700 <span>BC<\/span>) three well-preserved houses of this kind have been found. The houses were separated by walls at right angles to the city wall. Entrance to each house was through one door on the street, through a room, and into a courtyard paved with small stones and pebbles. The courtyards housed the ovens, and one house had a cistern.<\/p>\n<p>A fourth type of middle Bronze Age house had rooms on three sides of the courtyard. These rooms varied greatly in size and use. A good example dating to about 1600 <span>BC<\/span> comes from Megiddo, level IX. The house was 42 by 39 feet (12.8 by 11.9 meters) in size and contained nine rooms of varying sizes. The courtyard was plastered with lime and had a large oven in the center. A second oven was found in an eastern room. Each room had a door to the courtyard. This house, like others of the middle Bronze Age, had burials under the floors (cf. 1 Sm 25:1; 1 Kgs 2:34 for biblical references in the Iron Age).<\/p>\n<p>The wide variety of Palestinian houses during the middle Bronze Age points to a level of prosperity much higher than that of the early Bronze Age. Both houses and tombs yielded quantities of graceful and well-made household utensils.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LateBronzeAgeHouses\">Late Bronze Age Houses (c. 1550–1200 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Information is limited for this period, due partly to the accidents of excavation and partly to the severe destruction of many sites at the close of the age from the hands of Israelites, Sea Peoples, Egyptians, and others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteHousesoftheIronAge\">Israelite Houses of the Iron Age (c. 1200–600 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Many examples of domestic buildings come from this period. The Israelite structures were at first rather crude, but the quality improved. Thus at Tell Qasil in the 12th century there were poor homes with a courtyard and single room on one side. At contemporary Beth-shemesh one larger house had a foundation of large uncut stones, a courtyard some 34 by 20 feet (10.4 by 6.1 meters), and three rooms on one side 11 by 10½ feet (3.4 by 3.2 meters). There was rough stone paving in the court and in two of the rooms. At Hazor a house was discovered that had a courtyard and rooms on one side dating to about 900 <span>BC<\/span>. Half of the courtyard was covered, the roof being supported on stone pillars. These stone pillars are very characteristic of the Iron Age houses in Palestine and have been found in sites all over the country.<\/p>\n<p>The most common type of house in the days of the kings of Judah and Israel was one in which rooms were built on three sides of a courtyard. This type of house has sometimes been called the “four-room house.” A long room was built across the short axis of the courtyard, and two other rooms, one on each side of the court, were constructed on the long axis. The courtyard was divided into three by two rows of pillars that extended down the long axis of the court. These pillars supported the roof and gave support for walls, either half height or full height. Entrance to the house was from the street into the courtyard, where ovens and silos were normally placed, although this varied. Such a framework could be expanded by adding a row of rooms outside the existing rooms on the long axis of the court. There were many ways to divide long rooms into smaller ones. In some cases where the walls were strong enough, a second story was added. An excellent example of a four-room house that was later enlarged was found at Shechem and dated to the period around 748–724 <span>BC<\/span>. The courtyard contained a storage bin, a large open hearth, a quern (hand mill), stone grinders, and the bases of pottery jars resting in stone pedestals. In the rooms that had been added there was a device for catching water from the roof and delivering it to an underground water system. A large silo in one room was connected to a kitchen.<\/p>\n<p>There is evidence that larger Iron Age houses served as industrial or commercial buildings. Certain houses at Tell Beit Mirsim contained dye vats and loom weights. In other places the large number of querns suggests a wheat-grinding industry. There is evidence also of wine vats, or potters’ equipment, and of shops. Some houses had rooms set apart for religious purposes and contained incense stands, figurines, small altars, and the like.<\/p>\n<p>The excavations of Kathleen Kenyon at Jerusalem brought to light houses from the last days of Judah. They were rather small and irregularly planned but of the same general design as those in the hill country sites of Judah—a courtyard divided by a row of stone pillars that supported the roof.<\/p>\n<p>The contrast between big houses and small houses in some towns probably indicates the social inequality referred to in the prophets. In the 10th and 9th centuries <span>BC<\/span> there was a fairly uniform picture of many small houses and a few large ones. By the 8th century <span>BC<\/span>, at a town like Tirzah, there were three or four large houses and a great many flimsy structures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HousesinNewTestamentTimes\">Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>There are references in the NT to houses, roofs, doors, foundations, an upper room, and lamps. One of Jesus’ parables refers to good and bad foundations (Mt 7:25). In one incident friends took a paralyzed man up to the roof, which they took apart to lower him into the room where Jesus was (Mk 2:4). Jesus referred to proclamations made from the housetops (Mt 10:27; Lk 12:3), and Peter went up on the roof to pray (Acts 10:9). Houses were swept to find lost objects (Lk 15:8) and illuminated by lamps (Mt 5:15). There are several references to houses of specific individuals (Mk 8:3; Lk 10:5; 16:4; 19:9; Jn 11:20; Acts 4:34; 9:11; 10:32). Some houses had upper rooms on the roof reached by an outside staircase. The Passover meal was prepared in such a large upstairs room (Mk 14:12-15). The disciples lodged in a similar room after the death and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 1:13). In such houses there were sometimes servants (10:7), and some had a guest room (Mk 14:14). We conclude from the NT data that there was a variety in the size and elegance of the houses of Jesus’ day. A typical street in Judea or Galilee would have houses ranging from the small house (25 to 30 square feet or 2.3 to 2.8 square meters) to the mansion of the upper classes, which could be two or more stories high embellished by rows of pillars and architectural adornment.<\/p>\n<p>For the precise character of these houses, we have to turn to archaeological and literary evidence. The writings of the rabbis and Josephus fill in many details. Excavation in sites of the early Roman (Herodian) period (37 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70) have provided more tangible evidence. A rich source of information is the excavation in the old Jewish quarter in Jerusalem. One large house of some 209 square yards in size had a central courtyard where three cooking ovens and a water cistern were found. Large niches set in some of the walls contained broken pottery and must have been cupboards. Traces of mosaic floors and plastered walls give an idea of the beauty of this house. There were several rooms off the courtyard, perhaps as many as ten. The remains of other fine houses of the late second temple period have been found further west, notably in the area of the Armenian cemetery on Mt Zion, in which beautiful frescoes were preserved exhibiting a unique representation of birds. Other houses have yielded mosaic pavements with purely geometric patterns, thus adhering to the injunction against depicting animal forms.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Architecture.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOMES AND DWELLINGS<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Middle Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Late Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Houses of the Iron Age<\/p>\n<p>• Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiddleBronzeAgeHouses\">Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard.<\/p>\n<p>The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on one side, generally on the west of the courtyard, to avoid having the prevailing westerly winds blow smoke into the room. Silos for storing grain were normally in the room rather than in the courtyard. Good examples of such one-roomed houses were found at Tell Nagila, northwest of Beersheba, dating to about 1700 <span>BC<\/span>. Three such houses had a room 10 by 7 feet (3 by 2.1 meters) and a courtyard 10 by 16 feet (3 by 4.9 meters). Partitions sometimes divided the room. The walls were made of rough stone and mud bricks covered by mud plaster and were hardly thick enough to carry a second story. Houses were set close together to take advantage of a common back wall with entrances to the court on roughly parallel streets. Each house contained a stone and clay bench along the walls.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes several rooms were built off one side of the courtyard. The grandest of these yet found comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1600 <span>BC<\/span>, probably the house of a local governor or patrician. There were no less than six rooms on the western side of the courtyard, which was some 35 by 19 feet (10.7 by 5.8 meters) in size. The roofed living space, including both the ground and second floors, was about 1,500 square feet (139 square meters); a second floor is assumed from the thickness of the walls all around. The ground floor may have been multifunctional with two stable rooms and two storage areas. Other less imposing variants of the courtyard house with rooms on one side only come from this same tell in Stratum E (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The second type of house in the middle Bronze Age had a roofed hall with rooms on one or two sides. A good example of such a house with rooms on one side comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1800 <span>BC<\/span>. The large, roofed, rectangular hall contained three large, flat stones set along the long axis to serve as foundations for the wooden roof supports. Rafters of wood and a roof of reeds covered with mud were found in the debris. Each of the three rooms on the west was entered from the hall. The stone foundations and mud brick walls were substantial enough to support a second story that could be reached by an exterior wooden staircase or ladder. The floor of earth, ashes, and straw was carefully smoothed over.<\/p>\n<p>A third type of house consisted of an open courtyard with rooms on two adjacent sides of the court. A good example comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, built on the ruins of the house with the roofed hall. The roofed hall became the court. A house at Tell Taanach from the middle Bronze IIB period (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>) was of very strong construction with walls over three feet (.9 meter) thick laid in mortar. The courtyard contained a cistern, and an oven was found in a room on the east side of the house. The ground floors were plastered and covered 2,300 square feet (214 square meters). An interior staircase led to a second story.<\/p>\n<p>In some houses, rooms were placed at opposite sides of the courtyard. Good examples come from Beth Shemesh (Tell er-Rumeilah) and Megiddo. At Beth Shemesh the city wall formed the south wall of the house, and rooms lay east and west of the courtyard. Entrance was from the street into one of the rooms. The other rooms were entered by crossing the courtyard. The outer walls were over three feet (91.4 centimeters) thick and interior walls a foot and a half (45.7 centimeters) thick. Mud and lime plaster coated the walls.<\/p>\n<p>At Megiddo houses were built against the north city wall. In level XII (c. 1750–1700 <span>BC<\/span>) three well-preserved houses of this kind have been found. The houses were separated by walls at right angles to the city wall. Entrance to each house was through one door on the street, through a room, and into a courtyard paved with small stones and pebbles. The courtyards housed the ovens, and one house had a cistern.<\/p>\n<p>A fourth type of middle Bronze Age house had rooms on three sides of the courtyard. These rooms varied greatly in size and use. A good example dating to about 1600 <span>BC<\/span> comes from Megiddo, level IX. The house was 42 by 39 feet (12.8 by 11.9 meters) in size and contained nine rooms of varying sizes. The courtyard was plastered with lime and had a large oven in the center. A second oven was found in an eastern room. Each room had a door to the courtyard. This house, like others of the middle Bronze Age, had burials under the floors (cf. 1 Sm 25:1; 1 Kgs 2:34 for biblical references in the Iron Age).<\/p>\n<p>The wide variety of Palestinian houses during the middle Bronze Age points to a level of prosperity much higher than that of the early Bronze Age. Both houses and tombs yielded quantities of graceful and well-made household utensils.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LateBronzeAgeHouses\">Late Bronze Age Houses (c. 1550–1200 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Information is limited for this period, due partly to the accidents of excavation and partly to the severe destruction of many sites at the close of the age from the hands of Israelites, Sea Peoples, Egyptians, and others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteHousesoftheIronAge\">Israelite Houses of the Iron Age (c. 1200–600 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Many examples of domestic buildings come from this period. The Israelite structures were at first rather crude, but the quality improved. Thus at Tell Qasil in the 12th century there were poor homes with a courtyard and single room on one side. At contemporary Beth-shemesh one larger house had a foundation of large uncut stones, a courtyard some 34 by 20 feet (10.4 by 6.1 meters), and three rooms on one side 11 by 10½ feet (3.4 by 3.2 meters). There was rough stone paving in the court and in two of the rooms. At Hazor a house was discovered that had a courtyard and rooms on one side dating to about 900 <span>BC<\/span>. Half of the courtyard was covered, the roof being supported on stone pillars. These stone pillars are very characteristic of the Iron Age houses in Palestine and have been found in sites all over the country.<\/p>\n<p>The most common type of house in the days of the kings of Judah and Israel was one in which rooms were built on three sides of a courtyard. This type of house has sometimes been called the “four-room house.” A long room was built across the short axis of the courtyard, and two other rooms, one on each side of the court, were constructed on the long axis. The courtyard was divided into three by two rows of pillars that extended down the long axis of the court. These pillars supported the roof and gave support for walls, either half height or full height. Entrance to the house was from the street into the courtyard, where ovens and silos were normally placed, although this varied. Such a framework could be expanded by adding a row of rooms outside the existing rooms on the long axis of the court. There were many ways to divide long rooms into smaller ones. In some cases where the walls were strong enough, a second story was added. An excellent example of a four-room house that was later enlarged was found at Shechem and dated to the period around 748–724 <span>BC<\/span>. The courtyard contained a storage bin, a large open hearth, a quern (hand mill), stone grinders, and the bases of pottery jars resting in stone pedestals. In the rooms that had been added there was a device for catching water from the roof and delivering it to an underground water system. A large silo in one room was connected to a kitchen.<\/p>\n<p>There is evidence that larger Iron Age houses served as industrial or commercial buildings. Certain houses at Tell Beit Mirsim contained dye vats and loom weights. In other places the large number of querns suggests a wheat-grinding industry. There is evidence also of wine vats, or potters’ equipment, and of shops. Some houses had rooms set apart for religious purposes and contained incense stands, figurines, small altars, and the like.<\/p>\n<p>The excavations of Kathleen Kenyon at Jerusalem brought to light houses from the last days of Judah. They were rather small and irregularly planned but of the same general design as those in the hill country sites of Judah—a courtyard divided by a row of stone pillars that supported the roof.<\/p>\n<p>The contrast between big houses and small houses in some towns probably indicates the social inequality referred to in the prophets. In the 10th and 9th centuries <span>BC<\/span> there was a fairly uniform picture of many small houses and a few large ones. By the 8th century <span>BC<\/span>, at a town like Tirzah, there were three or four large houses and a great many flimsy structures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HousesinNewTestamentTimes\">Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>There are references in the NT to houses, roofs, doors, foundations, an upper room, and lamps. One of Jesus’ parables refers to good and bad foundations (Mt 7:25). In one incident friends took a paralyzed man up to the roof, which they took apart to lower him into the room where Jesus was (Mk 2:4). Jesus referred to proclamations made from the housetops (Mt 10:27; Lk 12:3), and Peter went up on the roof to pray (Acts 10:9). Houses were swept to find lost objects (Lk 15:8) and illuminated by lamps (Mt 5:15). There are several references to houses of specific individuals (Mk 8:3; Lk 10:5; 16:4; 19:9; Jn 11:20; Acts 4:34; 9:11; 10:32). Some houses had upper rooms on the roof reached by an outside staircase. The Passover meal was prepared in such a large upstairs room (Mk 14:12-15). The disciples lodged in a similar room after the death and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 1:13). In such houses there were sometimes servants (10:7), and some had a guest room (Mk 14:14). We conclude from the NT data that there was a variety in the size and elegance of the houses of Jesus’ day. A typical street in Judea or Galilee would have houses ranging from the small house (25 to 30 square feet or 2.3 to 2.8 square meters) to the mansion of the upper classes, which could be two or more stories high embellished by rows of pillars and architectural adornment.<\/p>\n<p>For the precise character of these houses, we have to turn to archaeological and literary evidence. The writings of the rabbis and Josephus fill in many details. Excavation in sites of the early Roman (Herodian) period (37 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70) have provided more tangible evidence. A rich source of information is the excavation in the old Jewish quarter in Jerusalem. One large house of some 209 square yards in size had a central courtyard where three cooking ovens and a water cistern were found. Large niches set in some of the walls contained broken pottery and must have been cupboards. Traces of mosaic floors and plastered walls give an idea of the beauty of this house. There were several rooms off the courtyard, perhaps as many as ten. The remains of other fine houses of the late second temple period have been found further west, notably in the area of the Armenian cemetery on Mt Zion, in which beautiful frescoes were preserved exhibiting a unique representation of birds. Other houses have yielded mosaic pavements with purely geometric patterns, thus adhering to the injunction against depicting animal forms.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Architecture.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOMES AND DWELLINGS Preview • Middle Bronze Age Houses • Late Bronze Age Houses • Israelite Houses of the Iron Age • Houses in New Testament Times Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 BC) Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard. The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on o...","summary_en":"HOMES AND DWELLINGS Preview • Middle Bronze Age Houses • Late Bronze Age Houses • Israelite Houses of the Iron Age • Houses in New Testament Times Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 BC) Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard. The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on o...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29370,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peace","title_en":"Peace","content_ro":"<h3>PEACE<\/h3>\n<p>Total well-being, prosperity, and security associated with God’s presence among his people. Linked in the OT with the covenant, the presence of peace was conditional, based on Israel’s obedience. In the prophetic writings, true peace is part of the end-time hope of God’s salvation. In the NT, this longed-for peace is understood as having come in Christ and can be experienced by the believers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> the most prominent OT term for “peace,” held a wide range of connotations (wholeness, health, security, well-being, and salvation) and could apply to an equally wide range of contexts: the state of the individual (Ps 37:37; Prv 3:2; Is 32:17), the relationship of person to person (Gn 34:21; Jos 9:15) or nation to nation (e.g., absence of conflict—Dt 2:26; Jos 10:21; 1 Kgs 5:12; Ps 122:6-7), and the relationship of God and people (Ps 85:8; Jer 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>The presence of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> in any of these contexts was not considered ultimately as the outcome of human endeavor but as a gift or blessing of God (Lv 26:6; 1 Kgs 2:33; Jb 25:2; Pss 29:11; 85:8; Is 45:7). It is not surprising, therefore, to find “peace” tied closely to the OT notion of covenant. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span> was the desired state of harmony and communion between the two covenant partners—God and his people (Nm 6:26; cf. Is 54:10). Its presence signified God’s blessing in the covenant relationship (Mal 2:5; cf. Nm 25:12), and its absence signified the breakdown of that relationship due to Israel’s disobedience and unrighteousness (Jer 16:5, 10-13; cf. Ps 85:9-11; Is 32:17).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span> becomes a pivotal term in the prophetic writings. It was the “false” prophets who, forgetting the conditions for national well-being within the covenant relationship, assumed God’s loyalty to Israel (Ps 89) would guarantee political peace forever (Jer 6:14; 8:15; Ez 13:10, 16; Mi 3:5). Against such popular but false security, the preexilic prophets proclaimed the coming judgment precisely as a loss of this <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> due to Israel’s persistent disobedience and unrighteousness (Is 48:18; Jer 14:13-16; 16:5, 10-13; 28; Mi 3:4, 9-12).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets did, however, point beyond the crises of exile and subsequent setbacks to a time when <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> characterized by prosperity and well-being (Is 45:7; Ez 34:25-26), absence of conflict (Is 2:2-4; 32:15-20; Ez 34:28-31), right relations (Is 11:1-5; Mi 4:1-4; Zec 8:9-13), restoration of harmony in nature (Is 11:6-9; Ez 47:1-12), and salvation (Is 52:7; 60:17; Ez 34:30-31; 37:26-28) would again return. Often this eschatological (or end-time) expectation of peace in the OT was associated with a messianic figure, as in Isaiah 9:6, where the future Messiah is termed the “Prince of Peace.” Moreover, his reign would be one of “peace” not only for Israel but throughout the whole earth (Zec 9:9-10). The OT ends with this hope of peace still unrealized in its full sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Greek term for “peace” used predominantly in the NT is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eirene<\/span><em>,<\/em> a word expanded from its classical Greek connotation of “rest” to include the various connotations of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> discussed above. As with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eirene<\/span> could be used as a greeting or farewell (as in “peace be with you”—Lk 10:5; Gal 6:16; Jas 2:16; cf. Jn 20:19), or could signify the cessation of conflict (national—Lk 14:32; Acts 12:20; or interpersonal—Rom 14:19; Eph 4:3), or the presence of domestic tranquillity (cf. 1 Cor 7:15).<\/p>\n<p>The chief issue concerns how Jesus incorporated the OT hope for the eschatological peace of God into his ministry. In the “benedictus” of Zechariah (Lk 1:67-79), the coming of Jesus as the Messiah is expected to “guide our feet into the way of peace” (v 79). So also the angelic testimony to the shepherds proclaims Jesus as the bringer of God’s peace to people (2:14). That is, Jesus as the Messiah would usher in God’s reign of peace. Jesus’ self-understanding as expressed in the fourth Gospel corresponds to this association. This long-expected peace of God is Jesus’ farewell gift to the disciples (Jn 14:27); it is given to them when he breathed his Spirit into them (20:19-22).<\/p>\n<p>The nature of this gift of peace brought by Jesus may be easier to explain by stating what it is not. It is not an end to tension or the absence of warfare. It is not domestic tranquillity nor anything like the worldly estimation of peace (Lk 12:51-53; Jn 14:27; 16:32-33). Its presence may, on the contrary, actually disturb existing relations, being a dividing “sword” in familial relations (Mt 10:34-37). Jesus’ gift of peace is, in reality, the character and mood of the new covenant of his blood that reconciles God to people (Rom 5:1; Col 1:20) and forms the basis of subsequent reconciliation between divergent people (Eph 2:14-22).<\/p>\n<p>The early church understood “peace” to be the final, end-time salvation of God given already through Jesus Christ (cf. Phil 4:7-9). This understanding of “peace” altered the content of the common greeting “go in peace” as it was taken up in the Christian community. In Paul’s common “grace and peace” greeting (1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph 1:2, etc.; cf. also 1 Pt 1:2; 2 Jn 1:3; Jude 1:2; Rv 1:4), it is no longer a mere wish for peace that Paul extends to his readers but is a reminder of the messianic gifts available in the present time through Christ to the man of faith. In accord with this, Jesus is described as “peace” itself (Eph 2:14), while God, too, because of his act of reconciliation through Christ, is known as a “God of peace” (Phil 4:9; Col 3:15).<\/p>\n<p>This gift of peace or reconciliation with God, made available through Christ, places an ethical demand on the Christian; it calls for the exercises of “peace” (as reconciliation between persons) within the church. Peace, as a fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22), is to be the goal of the Christian’s dealings with others (Rom 12:18; 14:19; Heb 12:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PEACE<\/h3>\n<p>Total well-being, prosperity, and security associated with God’s presence among his people. Linked in the OT with the covenant, the presence of peace was conditional, based on Israel’s obedience. In the prophetic writings, true peace is part of the end-time hope of God’s salvation. In the NT, this longed-for peace is understood as having come in Christ and can be experienced by the believers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> the most prominent OT term for “peace,” held a wide range of connotations (wholeness, health, security, well-being, and salvation) and could apply to an equally wide range of contexts: the state of the individual (Ps 37:37; Prv 3:2; Is 32:17), the relationship of person to person (Gn 34:21; Jos 9:15) or nation to nation (e.g., absence of conflict—Dt 2:26; Jos 10:21; 1 Kgs 5:12; Ps 122:6-7), and the relationship of God and people (Ps 85:8; Jer 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>The presence of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> in any of these contexts was not considered ultimately as the outcome of human endeavor but as a gift or blessing of God (Lv 26:6; 1 Kgs 2:33; Jb 25:2; Pss 29:11; 85:8; Is 45:7). It is not surprising, therefore, to find “peace” tied closely to the OT notion of covenant. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span> was the desired state of harmony and communion between the two covenant partners—God and his people (Nm 6:26; cf. Is 54:10). Its presence signified God’s blessing in the covenant relationship (Mal 2:5; cf. Nm 25:12), and its absence signified the breakdown of that relationship due to Israel’s disobedience and unrighteousness (Jer 16:5, 10-13; cf. Ps 85:9-11; Is 32:17).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span> becomes a pivotal term in the prophetic writings. It was the “false” prophets who, forgetting the conditions for national well-being within the covenant relationship, assumed God’s loyalty to Israel (Ps 89) would guarantee political peace forever (Jer 6:14; 8:15; Ez 13:10, 16; Mi 3:5). Against such popular but false security, the preexilic prophets proclaimed the coming judgment precisely as a loss of this <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> due to Israel’s persistent disobedience and unrighteousness (Is 48:18; Jer 14:13-16; 16:5, 10-13; 28; Mi 3:4, 9-12).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets did, however, point beyond the crises of exile and subsequent setbacks to a time when <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> characterized by prosperity and well-being (Is 45:7; Ez 34:25-26), absence of conflict (Is 2:2-4; 32:15-20; Ez 34:28-31), right relations (Is 11:1-5; Mi 4:1-4; Zec 8:9-13), restoration of harmony in nature (Is 11:6-9; Ez 47:1-12), and salvation (Is 52:7; 60:17; Ez 34:30-31; 37:26-28) would again return. Often this eschatological (or end-time) expectation of peace in the OT was associated with a messianic figure, as in Isaiah 9:6, where the future Messiah is termed the “Prince of Peace.” Moreover, his reign would be one of “peace” not only for Israel but throughout the whole earth (Zec 9:9-10). The OT ends with this hope of peace still unrealized in its full sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Greek term for “peace” used predominantly in the NT is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eirene<\/span><em>,<\/em> a word expanded from its classical Greek connotation of “rest” to include the various connotations of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> discussed above. As with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eirene<\/span> could be used as a greeting or farewell (as in “peace be with you”—Lk 10:5; Gal 6:16; Jas 2:16; cf. Jn 20:19), or could signify the cessation of conflict (national—Lk 14:32; Acts 12:20; or interpersonal—Rom 14:19; Eph 4:3), or the presence of domestic tranquillity (cf. 1 Cor 7:15).<\/p>\n<p>The chief issue concerns how Jesus incorporated the OT hope for the eschatological peace of God into his ministry. In the “benedictus” of Zechariah (Lk 1:67-79), the coming of Jesus as the Messiah is expected to “guide our feet into the way of peace” (v 79). So also the angelic testimony to the shepherds proclaims Jesus as the bringer of God’s peace to people (2:14). That is, Jesus as the Messiah would usher in God’s reign of peace. Jesus’ self-understanding as expressed in the fourth Gospel corresponds to this association. This long-expected peace of God is Jesus’ farewell gift to the disciples (Jn 14:27); it is given to them when he breathed his Spirit into them (20:19-22).<\/p>\n<p>The nature of this gift of peace brought by Jesus may be easier to explain by stating what it is not. It is not an end to tension or the absence of warfare. It is not domestic tranquillity nor anything like the worldly estimation of peace (Lk 12:51-53; Jn 14:27; 16:32-33). Its presence may, on the contrary, actually disturb existing relations, being a dividing “sword” in familial relations (Mt 10:34-37). Jesus’ gift of peace is, in reality, the character and mood of the new covenant of his blood that reconciles God to people (Rom 5:1; Col 1:20) and forms the basis of subsequent reconciliation between divergent people (Eph 2:14-22).<\/p>\n<p>The early church understood “peace” to be the final, end-time salvation of God given already through Jesus Christ (cf. Phil 4:7-9). This understanding of “peace” altered the content of the common greeting “go in peace” as it was taken up in the Christian community. In Paul’s common “grace and peace” greeting (1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph 1:2, etc.; cf. also 1 Pt 1:2; 2 Jn 1:3; Jude 1:2; Rv 1:4), it is no longer a mere wish for peace that Paul extends to his readers but is a reminder of the messianic gifts available in the present time through Christ to the man of faith. In accord with this, Jesus is described as “peace” itself (Eph 2:14), while God, too, because of his act of reconciliation through Christ, is known as a “God of peace” (Phil 4:9; Col 3:15).<\/p>\n<p>This gift of peace or reconciliation with God, made available through Christ, places an ethical demand on the Christian; it calls for the exercises of “peace” (as reconciliation between persons) within the church. Peace, as a fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22), is to be the goal of the Christian’s dealings with others (Rom 12:18; 14:19; Heb 12:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PEACE Total well-being, prosperity, and security associated with God’s presence among his people. Linked in the OT with the covenant, the presence of peace was conditional, based on Israel’s obedience. In the prophetic writings, true peace is part of the end-time hope of God’s salvation. In the NT, this longed-for peace is understood as having come in Christ and can be experienced by the believers. In the Old Testament Shalom, the most prominent OT term for “peace,” held a wide range of conno...","summary_en":"PEACE Total well-being, prosperity, and security associated with God’s presence among his people. Linked in the OT with the covenant, the presence of peace was conditional, based on Israel’s obedience. In the prophetic writings, true peace is part of the end-time hope of God’s salvation. In the NT, this longed-for peace is understood as having come in Christ and can be experienced by the believers. In the Old Testament Shalom, the most prominent OT term for “peace,” held a wide range of conno...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55876,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:5","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> <em>God’s peace<\/em> means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> of God (see study note on 8:48).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> <em>God’s peace<\/em> means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> of God (see study note on 8:48).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:5 God’s peace means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the shalom of God (see study note on 8:48).","summary_en":"10:5 God’s peace means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the shalom of God (see study note on 8:48).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83502,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:5","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> <em>God’s peace<\/em> means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> of God (see study note on 8:48).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> <em>God’s peace<\/em> means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> of God (see study note on 8:48).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:5 God’s peace means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the shalom of God (see study note on 8:48).","summary_en":"10:5 God’s peace means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the shalom of God (see study note on 8:48).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111128,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:5","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> <em>God’s peace<\/em> means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> of God (see study note on 8:48).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> <em>God’s peace<\/em> means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> of God (see study note on 8:48).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:5 God’s peace means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the shalom of God (see study note on 8:48).","summary_en":"10:5 God’s peace means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the shalom of God (see study note on 8:48).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138754,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:5","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> <em>God’s peace<\/em> means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> of God (see study note on 8:48).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> <em>God’s peace<\/em> means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> of God (see study note on 8:48).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:5 God’s peace means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the shalom of God (see study note on 8:48).","summary_en":"10:5 God’s peace means spiritual blessings and wholeness, the shalom of God (see study note on 8:48).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":4640,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bible*","title_en":"Bible*","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*<\/h3>\n<p>Derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">biblia<\/span> (“books”), which, though plural, came to be used as a singular noun and to stand for the collection of books known as the Scriptures. The idea of a collection of holy writings developed early in Hebrew-Christian thought. Daniel in the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> spoke of a prophetic writing as “the books” (Dn 9:2). The writer of 1 Maccabees (second century <span>BC<\/span>) referred to the OT as “the holy books” (12:9). Jesus referred to the OT books as “the scriptures” (Mt 21:42), and Paul spoke of them as “the holy scriptures” (Rom 1:2).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible is divided into the Old Testament and the New Testament. Of course, there was no OT and NT before the coming of Christ, only one collection of sacred writings. But after the apostles and their associates produced another body of sacred literature, the church began to refer to the OT and the NT. Actually “testament” is the translation of a Greek word that might better be rendered “covenant.” It denotes an arrangement made by God for the spiritual guidance and benefit of human beings. The covenant is unalterable: humankind may accept it or reject it but cannot change it. “Covenant” is a common OT word; of several covenants described in the OT, the most prominent was the law given to Moses. While Israel was chafing and failing under the Mosaic covenant, God promised them a “new covenant” (Jer 31:31).<\/p>\n<p>The term “new covenant” appears several times in the NT. Jesus used it when he instituted the Lord’s Supper; by it he sought to call attention to the new basis of communion with God he intended to establish by his death (Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25). The apostle Paul also spoke of that new covenant (2 Cor 3:6, 14), as did the writer to the Hebrews (Heb 8:8; 9:11-15). The detailed description of God’s new method of dealing with people (on the basis of the finished work of Christ on the cross) is the subject of the 27 books of the NT. God’s dealing with people in anticipation of the coming of Messiah (Hebrew equivalent of “Christ,” meaning “anointed one”) is certainly the major theme of the 39 books of the OT, though they deal with much more than that. Latin church writers used <em>testamentum<\/em> to translate “covenant,” and from them the use passed into English; so old and new covenants became OT and NT.<\/p>\n<p>At least the first half of the OT follows a logical and easily understood arrangement. In Genesis through Esther the history of Israel from Abraham to the restoration under Persian auspices appears largely in chronological order. Then follows a group of poetic books and the Major and Minor Prophets (“Major” meaning the books that are relatively long; “Minor” meaning the books that are relatively short).<\/p>\n<p>The NT also follows a generally logical arrangement. It begins with the four Gospels, which describe the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ and his training of disciples to carry on his work after his ascension. The book of Acts continues the narrative where the Gospels end and details the founding of the church and its spread through Mediterranean lands. In the latter part of the book the spotlight focuses on the apostle Paul and his church planting activities. Next come letters Paul addressed to churches he founded or to young ministers he tried to encourage. Following the Pauline Epistles come a group commonly called the General Epistles. The last book, Revelation, is an apocalyptic work.<\/p>\n<p>The OT was written almost entirely in Hebrew with a few isolated passages in Aramaic in the latter books. If one accepts the view that Moses wrote the first five books of the OT (the position the Scripture itself takes), the earliest books of the OT were written by about 1400 <span>BC<\/span> (provided one accepts the early date proposed for the exodus). If the last book written was Malachi (before 400 <span>BC<\/span>), composition took place during 1,000 years of time. All the writers (some 30 in number) were Jews: prophets, judges, kings, and other leaders in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The NT was probably written entirely in Greek. If James was the first to write a NT book before the middle of the first century, and if John was the last (composing Revelation about <span>AD<\/span> 90), the NT was written during a 50-year period in the latter half of the first century. All the writers (probably nine) were Jews, with the exception of Luke (writer of Luke and Acts), and they came from a variety of walks of life: fishermen, doctor, tax collector, and religious leaders.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of great diversity of authorship in the OT and NT, and composition spanning over 1,500 years, there is remarkable unity in the total thrust. Christians believe that God must have been superintending the production of a divine-human book that would properly present his message to humankind.<\/p>\n<p>The OT and NT are component parts of one divine revelation. The OT describes man and woman in the first paradise on the old earth; the NT concludes with a vision of the new heaven and new earth. The OT sees humankind as fallen from a sinless condition and separated from God; the NT views believers as restored to favor through the sacrifice of Christ. The OT predicts a coming Redeemer who will rescue men and women from eternal condemnation; the NT reveals the Christ who brought salvation. In most of the OT the spotlight focuses on a sacrificial system in which the blood of animals provided a temporary handling of the sin problem; in the New, Christ appeared as the one who came to put an end to all sacrifice—to be himself the supreme sacrifice. In the OT, numerous predictions foretold a coming Messiah who would save his people; in the New, scores of passages detail how those prophecies were minutely fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ: the “son of Abraham” and the “son of David” (Mt 1:1). As Augustine said more than 1,500 years ago, “The New is in the Old contained; the Old is in the New explained.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAuthorityoftheBible\">The Authority of the Bible<\/p>\n<p>Judge of men and nations, the self-revealed God wields unlimited authority and power. All creaturely authority and power is derived from that of God. As the sovereign Creator of all, the God of the Bible wills and has the right to be obeyed. The power God bestows is a divine trust, a stewardship. God’s creatures are morally accountable for their use or misuse of it. In fallen human society God wills civil government for the promotion of justice and order. He approves an ordering of authoritative and creative relationships in the home by stipulating certain responsibilities of husbands, wives, and children. He wills a pattern of priorities for the church as well: Jesus Christ the head, prophets and apostles through whom redemptive revelation came, and so on. The inspired Scriptures, revealing God’s transcendent will in objective written form, are the rule of faith and conduct through which Christ exercises his divine authority in the lives of Christians.<\/p>\n<p>Revolt against particular authorities has in our time widened into a revolt against all transcendent and external authority. The widespread questioning of authority is condoned and promoted in many academic circles. Philosophers with a radically secular outlook have affirmed that God and the supernatural are mythical conceptions, that natural processes and events comprise the only ultimate reality. All existence is said to be temporal and changing, all beliefs and ideals are declared to be relative to the age and culture in which they appear. Biblical religion, therefore, like all other, is asserted to be merely a cultural phenomenon. The Bible’s claim to divine authority is dismissed by such thinkers; transcendent revelation, fixed truths, and unchanging commandments are set aside as pious fictions.<\/p>\n<p>In the name of man’s supposed “coming of age,” radical secularism champions human autonomy and creative individuality. Man is his own lord and the inventor of his own ideals and values, it is said. He lives in a supposedly purposeless universe that has itself presumably been engendered by a cosmic accident. Therefore, human beings are declared to be wholly free to impose upon nature and history whatever moral criteria they prefer. In such a view, to insist on divinely given truths and values, on transcendent principles, would be to repress self-fulfillment and retard creative personal development. Hence, the radically secular view goes beyond opposing particular external authorities whose claims are considered arbitrary or immoral; radical secularism is aggressively hostile to all external and objective authority, viewing it as intrinsically restrictive of the autonomous human spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Any reader of the Bible recognizes rejection of divine authority and of a definitive revelation of what is right and good as an age-old phenomenon. It is not at all peculiar to contemporary man to “come of age”; it was found already in Eden. Adam and Eve revolted against the will of God in pursuit of individual preference and self-interest. But their revolt was recognized to be sin, not rationalized as philosophical <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span> at the frontiers of evolutionary advance.<\/p>\n<p>If one takes a strictly developmental view, which considers all reality contingent and changing, what basis remains for humanity’s decisively creative role in the universe? How could a purposeless cosmos cater to individual self-fulfillment? Only the biblical alternative of the Creator-Redeemer God, who fashioned human beings for moral obedience and a high spiritual destiny, truly preserves the permanent, universal dignity of the human species. The Bible does so, however, by a demanding call for personal spiritual decision. The Bible sets forth man’s superiority to the animals, his high dignity (“a little lower than God,” Ps 8:5, <span>nasb<\/span>) because of the divine rational and moral image that he bears by creation. In the context of universal human involvement in Adamic sin, the Bible utters a merciful divine call to redemptive renewal through the mediatorial person and work of Christ. Fallen humanity is invited to experience the Holy Spirit’s renewing work, to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ, and to anticipate a final destiny in the eternal presence of the God of justice and justification.<\/p>\n<p>Contemporary rejection of biblical tenets does not rest on any logical demonstration that the case for biblical theism is false; it turns rather on a subjective preference for alternative views of “the good life.”<\/p>\n<p>The Bible is not the only significant reminder that human beings stand daily in responsible relationship to the sovereign God. The Creator reveals his authority in the cosmos, in history, and in inner conscience, a disclosure of the living God that penetrates into the mind of every human being (Rom 1:18-20; 2:12-15). Rebellious suppression of that “general divine revelation” does not succeed in wholly suspending a fearsome sense of final divine accountability (1:32). Yet it is the Bible as “special revelation” that most clearly confronts our spiritually rebellious race with the reality and authority of God. In the Scriptures, the character and will of God, the meaning of human existence, the nature of the spiritual realm, and the purposes of God for human beings in all ages are stated in propositionally intelligible form that all can understand. The Bible publishes in objective form the criteria by which God judges individuals and nations, and the means of moral recovery and restoration to personal fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<p>Regard for the Bible is therefore decisive for the course of Western culture and in the long run for human civilization generally. Intelligible divine revelation, the basis for belief in the sovereign authority of the Creator-Redeemer God over all human life, rests on the reliability of what Scripture says about God and his purposes. Modern naturalism impugns the authority of the Bible and assails the claim that the Bible is the Word of God written, that is, a transcendently given revelation of the mind and will of God in objective literary form. Scriptural authority is the storm center both in the controversy over revealed religion and in the modern conflict over civilizational values.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblesViewofItself\">The Bible’s View of Itself<\/p>\n<p>The intelligible nature of divine revelation—the presupposition that God’s will is made known in the form of valid truths—is the central presupposition of the authority of the Bible. Much recent neo-Protestant theology demeaned the traditional evangelical emphasis as doctrinaire and static. It insisted instead that the authority of Scripture is to be experienced internally as a witness to divine grace engendering faith and obedience, thus disowning its objective character as universally valid truth. Somewhat inconsistently, almost all neo-Protestant theologians have appealed to the record to support cognitively whatever fragments of the whole seem to coincide with their divergent views, even though they disavow the Bible as a specially revealed corpus of authoritative divine teaching. If God’s revelational disclosure to chosen prophets and apostles is to be considered meaningful and true, it must be given not merely in isolated concepts capable of diverse meanings but in sentences or propositions. A proposition—that is, a subject, predicate, and connecting verb (or “copula”)—constitutes the minimal logical unit of intelligible communication. The OT prophetic formula “Thus saith the Lord” characteristically introduced propositionally disclosed truth. Jesus Christ employed the distinctive formula “But I say unto you” to introduce logically formed sentences that he represented as the veritable word or doctrine of God.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible is authoritative because it is divinely authorized; in its own terms, “all Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tm 3:16, <span>niv<\/span>). According to this passage, the whole OT (or any element of it) is divinely inspired. Extension of the same claim to the NT is not expressly stated, but it is not merely implied. The New Testament contains indications that its content was to be viewed, and was in fact viewed, as no less authoritative than the Old. The apostle Paul’s writings are catalogued with “other Scriptures” (2 Pt 3:15-16). Under the heading of “Scripture,” 1 Timothy 5:18 cites Luke 10:7 alongside Deuteronomy 25:4 (cf. 1 Cor 9:9). The book of Revelation, moreover, claims divine origin (1:1-3) and employs the term “prophecy” in the OT sense (22:9-10, 18). The apostles did not distinguish their spoken and written teaching but expressly declared their inspired proclamation to be the word of God (1 Cor 4:1; 2 Cor 5:20; 1 Thes 2:13).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible remains the most extensively printed, most widely translated, and most frequently read book in the world. Its words have been treasured in the hearts of multitudes like none other’s. All who have received its gifts of wisdom and promises of new life and power were at first strangers to its redemptive message, and many were hostile to its teaching and spiritual demands. In all generations its power to challenge persons of all races and lands has been demonstrated. Those who cherish the Book because it sustains future hope, brings meaning and power to the present, and correlates a misused past with the forgiving grace of God would not long experience such inner rewards if Scripture were not known to them as the authoritative, divinely revealed truth. To the Christian, Scripture is the Word of God given in the objective form of propositional truths through divinely inspired prophets and apostles, and the Holy Spirit is the giver of faith through that word.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>Several other major articles on the Bible follow:<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Canon of the<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Inspiration of the<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament)<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Versions of the (Ancient)<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Versions of the (English)<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*<\/h3>\n<p>Derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">biblia<\/span> (“books”), which, though plural, came to be used as a singular noun and to stand for the collection of books known as the Scriptures. The idea of a collection of holy writings developed early in Hebrew-Christian thought. Daniel in the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> spoke of a prophetic writing as “the books” (Dn 9:2). The writer of 1 Maccabees (second century <span>BC<\/span>) referred to the OT as “the holy books” (12:9). Jesus referred to the OT books as “the scriptures” (Mt 21:42), and Paul spoke of them as “the holy scriptures” (Rom 1:2).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible is divided into the Old Testament and the New Testament. Of course, there was no OT and NT before the coming of Christ, only one collection of sacred writings. But after the apostles and their associates produced another body of sacred literature, the church began to refer to the OT and the NT. Actually “testament” is the translation of a Greek word that might better be rendered “covenant.” It denotes an arrangement made by God for the spiritual guidance and benefit of human beings. The covenant is unalterable: humankind may accept it or reject it but cannot change it. “Covenant” is a common OT word; of several covenants described in the OT, the most prominent was the law given to Moses. While Israel was chafing and failing under the Mosaic covenant, God promised them a “new covenant” (Jer 31:31).<\/p>\n<p>The term “new covenant” appears several times in the NT. Jesus used it when he instituted the Lord’s Supper; by it he sought to call attention to the new basis of communion with God he intended to establish by his death (Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25). The apostle Paul also spoke of that new covenant (2 Cor 3:6, 14), as did the writer to the Hebrews (Heb 8:8; 9:11-15). The detailed description of God’s new method of dealing with people (on the basis of the finished work of Christ on the cross) is the subject of the 27 books of the NT. God’s dealing with people in anticipation of the coming of Messiah (Hebrew equivalent of “Christ,” meaning “anointed one”) is certainly the major theme of the 39 books of the OT, though they deal with much more than that. Latin church writers used <em>testamentum<\/em> to translate “covenant,” and from them the use passed into English; so old and new covenants became OT and NT.<\/p>\n<p>At least the first half of the OT follows a logical and easily understood arrangement. In Genesis through Esther the history of Israel from Abraham to the restoration under Persian auspices appears largely in chronological order. Then follows a group of poetic books and the Major and Minor Prophets (“Major” meaning the books that are relatively long; “Minor” meaning the books that are relatively short).<\/p>\n<p>The NT also follows a generally logical arrangement. It begins with the four Gospels, which describe the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ and his training of disciples to carry on his work after his ascension. The book of Acts continues the narrative where the Gospels end and details the founding of the church and its spread through Mediterranean lands. In the latter part of the book the spotlight focuses on the apostle Paul and his church planting activities. Next come letters Paul addressed to churches he founded or to young ministers he tried to encourage. Following the Pauline Epistles come a group commonly called the General Epistles. The last book, Revelation, is an apocalyptic work.<\/p>\n<p>The OT was written almost entirely in Hebrew with a few isolated passages in Aramaic in the latter books. If one accepts the view that Moses wrote the first five books of the OT (the position the Scripture itself takes), the earliest books of the OT were written by about 1400 <span>BC<\/span> (provided one accepts the early date proposed for the exodus). If the last book written was Malachi (before 400 <span>BC<\/span>), composition took place during 1,000 years of time. All the writers (some 30 in number) were Jews: prophets, judges, kings, and other leaders in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The NT was probably written entirely in Greek. If James was the first to write a NT book before the middle of the first century, and if John was the last (composing Revelation about <span>AD<\/span> 90), the NT was written during a 50-year period in the latter half of the first century. All the writers (probably nine) were Jews, with the exception of Luke (writer of Luke and Acts), and they came from a variety of walks of life: fishermen, doctor, tax collector, and religious leaders.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of great diversity of authorship in the OT and NT, and composition spanning over 1,500 years, there is remarkable unity in the total thrust. Christians believe that God must have been superintending the production of a divine-human book that would properly present his message to humankind.<\/p>\n<p>The OT and NT are component parts of one divine revelation. The OT describes man and woman in the first paradise on the old earth; the NT concludes with a vision of the new heaven and new earth. The OT sees humankind as fallen from a sinless condition and separated from God; the NT views believers as restored to favor through the sacrifice of Christ. The OT predicts a coming Redeemer who will rescue men and women from eternal condemnation; the NT reveals the Christ who brought salvation. In most of the OT the spotlight focuses on a sacrificial system in which the blood of animals provided a temporary handling of the sin problem; in the New, Christ appeared as the one who came to put an end to all sacrifice—to be himself the supreme sacrifice. In the OT, numerous predictions foretold a coming Messiah who would save his people; in the New, scores of passages detail how those prophecies were minutely fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ: the “son of Abraham” and the “son of David” (Mt 1:1). As Augustine said more than 1,500 years ago, “The New is in the Old contained; the Old is in the New explained.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAuthorityoftheBible\">The Authority of the Bible<\/p>\n<p>Judge of men and nations, the self-revealed God wields unlimited authority and power. All creaturely authority and power is derived from that of God. As the sovereign Creator of all, the God of the Bible wills and has the right to be obeyed. The power God bestows is a divine trust, a stewardship. God’s creatures are morally accountable for their use or misuse of it. In fallen human society God wills civil government for the promotion of justice and order. He approves an ordering of authoritative and creative relationships in the home by stipulating certain responsibilities of husbands, wives, and children. He wills a pattern of priorities for the church as well: Jesus Christ the head, prophets and apostles through whom redemptive revelation came, and so on. The inspired Scriptures, revealing God’s transcendent will in objective written form, are the rule of faith and conduct through which Christ exercises his divine authority in the lives of Christians.<\/p>\n<p>Revolt against particular authorities has in our time widened into a revolt against all transcendent and external authority. The widespread questioning of authority is condoned and promoted in many academic circles. Philosophers with a radically secular outlook have affirmed that God and the supernatural are mythical conceptions, that natural processes and events comprise the only ultimate reality. All existence is said to be temporal and changing, all beliefs and ideals are declared to be relative to the age and culture in which they appear. Biblical religion, therefore, like all other, is asserted to be merely a cultural phenomenon. The Bible’s claim to divine authority is dismissed by such thinkers; transcendent revelation, fixed truths, and unchanging commandments are set aside as pious fictions.<\/p>\n<p>In the name of man’s supposed “coming of age,” radical secularism champions human autonomy and creative individuality. Man is his own lord and the inventor of his own ideals and values, it is said. He lives in a supposedly purposeless universe that has itself presumably been engendered by a cosmic accident. Therefore, human beings are declared to be wholly free to impose upon nature and history whatever moral criteria they prefer. In such a view, to insist on divinely given truths and values, on transcendent principles, would be to repress self-fulfillment and retard creative personal development. Hence, the radically secular view goes beyond opposing particular external authorities whose claims are considered arbitrary or immoral; radical secularism is aggressively hostile to all external and objective authority, viewing it as intrinsically restrictive of the autonomous human spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Any reader of the Bible recognizes rejection of divine authority and of a definitive revelation of what is right and good as an age-old phenomenon. It is not at all peculiar to contemporary man to “come of age”; it was found already in Eden. Adam and Eve revolted against the will of God in pursuit of individual preference and self-interest. But their revolt was recognized to be sin, not rationalized as philosophical <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span> at the frontiers of evolutionary advance.<\/p>\n<p>If one takes a strictly developmental view, which considers all reality contingent and changing, what basis remains for humanity’s decisively creative role in the universe? How could a purposeless cosmos cater to individual self-fulfillment? Only the biblical alternative of the Creator-Redeemer God, who fashioned human beings for moral obedience and a high spiritual destiny, truly preserves the permanent, universal dignity of the human species. The Bible does so, however, by a demanding call for personal spiritual decision. The Bible sets forth man’s superiority to the animals, his high dignity (“a little lower than God,” Ps 8:5, <span>nasb<\/span>) because of the divine rational and moral image that he bears by creation. In the context of universal human involvement in Adamic sin, the Bible utters a merciful divine call to redemptive renewal through the mediatorial person and work of Christ. Fallen humanity is invited to experience the Holy Spirit’s renewing work, to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ, and to anticipate a final destiny in the eternal presence of the God of justice and justification.<\/p>\n<p>Contemporary rejection of biblical tenets does not rest on any logical demonstration that the case for biblical theism is false; it turns rather on a subjective preference for alternative views of “the good life.”<\/p>\n<p>The Bible is not the only significant reminder that human beings stand daily in responsible relationship to the sovereign God. The Creator reveals his authority in the cosmos, in history, and in inner conscience, a disclosure of the living God that penetrates into the mind of every human being (Rom 1:18-20; 2:12-15). Rebellious suppression of that “general divine revelation” does not succeed in wholly suspending a fearsome sense of final divine accountability (1:32). Yet it is the Bible as “special revelation” that most clearly confronts our spiritually rebellious race with the reality and authority of God. In the Scriptures, the character and will of God, the meaning of human existence, the nature of the spiritual realm, and the purposes of God for human beings in all ages are stated in propositionally intelligible form that all can understand. The Bible publishes in objective form the criteria by which God judges individuals and nations, and the means of moral recovery and restoration to personal fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<p>Regard for the Bible is therefore decisive for the course of Western culture and in the long run for human civilization generally. Intelligible divine revelation, the basis for belief in the sovereign authority of the Creator-Redeemer God over all human life, rests on the reliability of what Scripture says about God and his purposes. Modern naturalism impugns the authority of the Bible and assails the claim that the Bible is the Word of God written, that is, a transcendently given revelation of the mind and will of God in objective literary form. Scriptural authority is the storm center both in the controversy over revealed religion and in the modern conflict over civilizational values.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblesViewofItself\">The Bible’s View of Itself<\/p>\n<p>The intelligible nature of divine revelation—the presupposition that God’s will is made known in the form of valid truths—is the central presupposition of the authority of the Bible. Much recent neo-Protestant theology demeaned the traditional evangelical emphasis as doctrinaire and static. It insisted instead that the authority of Scripture is to be experienced internally as a witness to divine grace engendering faith and obedience, thus disowning its objective character as universally valid truth. Somewhat inconsistently, almost all neo-Protestant theologians have appealed to the record to support cognitively whatever fragments of the whole seem to coincide with their divergent views, even though they disavow the Bible as a specially revealed corpus of authoritative divine teaching. If God’s revelational disclosure to chosen prophets and apostles is to be considered meaningful and true, it must be given not merely in isolated concepts capable of diverse meanings but in sentences or propositions. A proposition—that is, a subject, predicate, and connecting verb (or “copula”)—constitutes the minimal logical unit of intelligible communication. The OT prophetic formula “Thus saith the Lord” characteristically introduced propositionally disclosed truth. Jesus Christ employed the distinctive formula “But I say unto you” to introduce logically formed sentences that he represented as the veritable word or doctrine of God.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible is authoritative because it is divinely authorized; in its own terms, “all Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tm 3:16, <span>niv<\/span>). According to this passage, the whole OT (or any element of it) is divinely inspired. Extension of the same claim to the NT is not expressly stated, but it is not merely implied. The New Testament contains indications that its content was to be viewed, and was in fact viewed, as no less authoritative than the Old. The apostle Paul’s writings are catalogued with “other Scriptures” (2 Pt 3:15-16). Under the heading of “Scripture,” 1 Timothy 5:18 cites Luke 10:7 alongside Deuteronomy 25:4 (cf. 1 Cor 9:9). The book of Revelation, moreover, claims divine origin (1:1-3) and employs the term “prophecy” in the OT sense (22:9-10, 18). The apostles did not distinguish their spoken and written teaching but expressly declared their inspired proclamation to be the word of God (1 Cor 4:1; 2 Cor 5:20; 1 Thes 2:13).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible remains the most extensively printed, most widely translated, and most frequently read book in the world. Its words have been treasured in the hearts of multitudes like none other’s. All who have received its gifts of wisdom and promises of new life and power were at first strangers to its redemptive message, and many were hostile to its teaching and spiritual demands. In all generations its power to challenge persons of all races and lands has been demonstrated. Those who cherish the Book because it sustains future hope, brings meaning and power to the present, and correlates a misused past with the forgiving grace of God would not long experience such inner rewards if Scripture were not known to them as the authoritative, divinely revealed truth. To the Christian, Scripture is the Word of God given in the objective form of propositional truths through divinely inspired prophets and apostles, and the Holy Spirit is the giver of faith through that word.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>Several other major articles on the Bible follow:<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Canon of the<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Inspiration of the<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament)<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Versions of the (Ancient)<\/p>\n<p>• Bible, Versions of the (English)<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE* Derived from the Greek biblia (“books”), which, though plural, came to be used as a singular noun and to stand for the collection of books known as the Scriptures. The idea of a collection of holy writings developed early in Hebrew-Christian thought. Daniel in the sixth century BC spoke of a prophetic writing as “the books” (Dn 9:2). The writer of 1 Maccabees (second century BC) referred to the OT as “the holy books” (12:9). Jesus referred to the OT books as “the scriptures” (Mt 21:42)...","summary_en":"BIBLE* Derived from the Greek biblia (“books”), which, though plural, came to be used as a singular noun and to stand for the collection of books known as the Scriptures. The idea of a collection of holy writings developed early in Hebrew-Christian thought. Daniel in the sixth century BC spoke of a prophetic writing as “the books” (Dn 9:2). The writer of 1 Maccabees (second century BC) referred to the OT as “the holy books” (12:9). Jesus referred to the OT books as “the scriptures” (Mt 21:42)...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4668,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible*, Canon","title_en":"of the Bible*, Canon","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, C<span>anon of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Those books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato, Aristotle, and Homer form a canon of Greek literature, so the NT books became the canon of Christian literature. The criteria for selecting the books in the Jewish canon (the OT) are not known but clearly had to do with their worth in the ongoing life and religion of the worshiping nation. The criteria of the selection of NT books revolved around their “apostolicity,” according to early church writers. Like those of the OT, these books were collected and preserved by local churches in the continuing process of their worship and need for authoritative guidance for Christian living. The formation of the canon was a process, rather than an event, that took several hundred years to reach finality in all parts of the Roman Empire. Local canons were the basis for comparison, and out of them eventually emerged the general canon that exists in Christendom today, although some of the Eastern churches have a NT that is slightly smaller than that accepted in the West. Judaism, as well as Christianity as a whole, believes that the Spirit of God was operative in some providential way in the production and preservation of his Word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CanonoftheOldTestament\">Canon of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament is a name that does not appear in Jewish literature. Jews prefer to call their collection of Scriptures the TANAK—an acronym formed from the first letters of <em>Torah<\/em> (Law), <em>Nevi<\/em><em>’<\/em><em>im<\/em> (Prophets), and <em>Kethubim<\/em> (Writings). In Luke 24:44 (<span>niv<\/span>), these are called the “Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (the first book of the Writings in the Hebrew Bible). Christians called their collection of writings the New Testament, or covenant, the latter term being a designation earlier used of the agreement God made with Abraham and the patriarchs, which was repeated by Christ to his apostles (Mt 26:28). Christians in the first century considered their new covenant from Christ (1 Cor 11:25) to be a continuation of the one made earlier with the patriarchs (Eph 2:12), spoken of by the prophets (Jer 31:31-34), and which was therefore called a former covenant (Heb 8:7-13; 9:1, 15-22) or in later centuries the OT. The terms “Old” and “New” do not appear in the apostolic fathers of the first and second century or in the apologists of the early- to mid-second century, but they do appear in the latter half of the second century in Justin Martyr (<em>Dialogues<\/em> 11:2), Irenaeus (<em>Against Heresies<\/em> 4.9.1), and Clement of Alexandria (<em>Stromata<\/em> 1:5). In these authors the expression referred more to the covenant itself than to the books containing it, though the transfer was eventually made. The term “canon” was not used in the OT or NT to refer to the Jewish Scriptures. The idea of limitation inherent in the word was not appropriate to the nature of religious authority in Jewish religion during the thousand years when the OT books were being written. Only the Torah was conceived as incapable of being added to or taken from (Dt 4:2). Jewish religion existed for a millennium, from Moses to Malachi, without a closed canon, i.e., an exclusive list of authoritative books. Never in their history did the people of the OT have the entire 39 books of the OT. When their canon was closed is not known. Although some questions were being asked about religious authority by rabbis at Jamnia 20 years after the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, we have our first list of 39 books produced by Melito of Sardis around <span>AD<\/span> 170. That list included no books written after the time of Malachi, unless one is disposed to date Daniel to the second century. The Prophets and the Writings were always considered secondary to the Law. Their composition and collection was a process rather than an event in the life of the people of Israel and functioned largely as a record of the nation’s response to the Law, which was so sacred that it was kept (according to rabbinical tradition: Babylonian Talmud, <em>Baba Bathra<\/em> 14a; cf. also <em>Cairo Damascus Document<\/em> 5.2) in the ark of the covenant that stood in the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle. In Deuteronomy 31:26, however, the Levites were commanded by Moses merely to put the Book of the Law beside the ark. Nevertheless, its very presence in the Holy of Holies establishes its uniqueness in relation to other OT books.<\/p>\n\n<p>The 39 books of the modern OT were originally divided into only 24, according to the uniform testimony of early Hebrew tradition. The Talmud, rabbinic literature, and probably 4 Esdras testify to this arrangement that included five books of the Law, eight Prophets, and eleven Writings (Greek—Hagiographa). Modern Hebrew Bibles reflect this tripartite arrangement that was used in the first three printed editions (Soncino, 1488; Naples, 1491–1493; Brescia, 1492–1494). The Law contained the Pentateuch in our familiar order, Genesis to Deuteronomy. The eight Prophets were Joshua, Judges, Samuel (1 and 2), Kings (1 and 2), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Minor Prophets (all 12), which were considered as one book and arranged in the same order as our English Bibles. The eleven books of Writings contained three of poetry (Ps, Prv, Jb), the Five Scrolls (Sg, Ru, Lam, Eccl, Est), which were read at the important feasts and arranged in the chronological order of their observance, and three of narrative or historical (Dn, Ezr-Neh, 1 and 2 Chr).<\/p>\n<p>Apart from authentic Jewish tradition, efforts were made to divide the books into 21, combining Ruth with Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremiah. Josephus was the first to do so, in the first century <span>AD<\/span>, but he was influenced by the Greek OT, the Septuagint. Origen observed in the early third century that this arrangement also corresponded to the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, as did Athanasius in the fourth, and others, including Jerome. It was dubiously concluded that the number of books in the Hebrew Bible had been divinely ordained to agree with the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet! Church fathers added their support to this coincidence, which became providence to them. All such efforts, however, are of Greek origin and have no support in Hebrew tradition.<\/p>\n<p>The oldest extant manuscripts of the complete OT in Hebrew are the Masoretic Texts, which are no earlier than the eighth century <span>AD<\/span>. Only manuscripts of individual books have been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Masoretic scribes apparently laid down no rules about arrangement of books because there is no uniform order of the Latter Prophets or the Writings in early Hebrew manuscripts. Nor is the situation any different in ancient Greek translations of the Hebrew. Great diversity exists in the order of books in all three of our oldest manuscripts—Codex Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus. All the early Christian authors who profess to give the order and contents of the Hebrew Bible but who do not reflect the Hebrew tripartite division are clearly dependent on the Alexandrian order reflected in these Greek editions, rather than on the Hebrew Bible. Modern Protestant Bibles follow the order of the Latin Vulgate and the content of the Hebrew. Both the Vulgate and the Septuagint (Greek translation) contained the Apocrypha, which was never accepted by the Jews. The Roman Catholic Church includes the Apocrypha in its English translations because of the influence of the Vulgate on Catholic tradition. It is considered deuterocanonical.<\/p>\n<p>Even though no uniformity of order was maintained, the Alexandrian order, reflected in the Greek manuscripts, generally arranged books according to their subject matter—narrative, history, poetry, and prophecy, with the apocryphal books appropriately interspersed into these categories. The Hebrew division was totally ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Early Hebrew Bibles divided the text into small paragraphs and larger sections somewhat akin to our paragraphs. These were indicated by spaces left between them—three letters between the small sections and nine letters between the larger ones. The number of sections is not the same in all manuscripts. Jesus probably referred to such sections in his comment concerning the “passage about the bush” (Mk 12:26). Later, liturgical needs led to further divisions of the text for the complete reading of the Law in Babylonian synagogues in one year (54 sections) and in Palestinian synagogues in three years (154 sections). These are reflected in the lectionary cycles marked in some early Hebrew Bibles.<\/p>\n<p>The division of the text into modern chapters, done in the 13th century (c. 1228) for the Latin Vulgate by Stephen Langton, was applied to the Hebrew Bible in 1518 (Bomberg Edition), but the numbers were not given to the chapters until 1571 in the text of Montanus, a Hebrew Bible with Latin interlinear translation. The verses were introduced in Bomberg’s Great Bible of 1547–48 in which every fifth verse was designated by a Hebrew numeral 1, 5, 10, and so on. Verses were inserted into the Latin Vulgate in 1555 in the small octavo edition of Stephanus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CanonoftheNewTestament\">Canon of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT was written within the period of half a century, several hundred years after the completion of the OT. Both halves of that statement would be questioned by modern critics, who would extend the time span for completion of both Testaments. The writer of this survey is confident of its truthfulness to historic fact, however, and the approach taken to canonization of both OT and NT is based solidly upon that twofold premise.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, we possess far higher certification of the OT canon than of the NT canon. We refer to the fact of our Lord’s own imprimatur by way of his use of the Hebrew Scriptures as the authoritative Word of God. Yet there is a sense in which Jesus Christ did establish the NT content or canon as well, by way of anticipation. It was he who promised, “The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” and “he will guide you into all truth” (Jn 14:26; 16:13, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>From this we can derive, in turn, the basic principle of canonicity for the NT. It is identical to that of the OT, since it narrows down to a matter of divine inspiration. Whether we think of the prophets of OT times or the apostles and their God-given associates of the New, the recognition at the very time of their writing that they were authentic spokesmen for God is what determines the intrinsic canonicity of their writing. It is altogether God’s Word only if it is God-breathed. We can be assured that the books under question were received by the church of the apostolic age precisely when they had been certified by an apostle as being thus inspired. The apparent variation, relative to geographic area, in acknowledgment of some of the NT epistles may well reflect the simple fact that this attestation was by its very nature localized at first. Conversely, that all 27 books of the now universally received NT were ultimately agreed upon is evidence that proper attestation was indeed confirmed after rigorous investigation.<\/p>\n<p>Tertullian, an outstanding Christian writer in the first two decades of the third century, was one of the first to call the Christian Scriptures the “New Testament.” That title had appeared earlier (c. 190) in a composition against Montanism, the author of which is unknown. This is significant. Its use placed the NT Scripture on a level of inspiration and authority with the OT.<\/p>\n<p>From available information, the gradual process that led to full and formal public recognition of a fixed canon of the 27 books comprising the NT takes us down into the fourth century of our era. This does not necessarily mean that these Scriptures were lacking recognition in their entirety before that time, but that a need for officially defining the canon was not pressing until then.<\/p>\n<p>Though a much shorter period of time was involved in the writing of the NT than the OT, the geographic range of its origin is far wider. This circumstance alone is sufficient to account for a lack of spontaneous or simultaneous recognition of the precise extent of the NT canon. Because of the geographic isolation of the various recipients of portions of the NT, there was bound to be some lag and uncertainty from one region to another in the acknowledgment of some of the books.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate just what did transpire in the process of canonization of the NT books, we must review the facts available to us. This will enable us to analyze <em>how<\/em> and <em>why<\/em> our early Christian forebears settled upon the 27 books in our NT.<\/p>\n<p>The historic process was a gradual and continuous one, but it will help us understand it if we subdivide the nearly three and a half centuries involved into shorter periods of time. Some speak of three major stages toward canonization. This implies, without justification, that there are readily discernible steps along the way. Others simply present a long list of the names of persons and documents involved. Such a list makes it difficult to sense any motion at all. A somewhat arbitrary breakdown into five periods will be made here, with the reminder that the spreading of the knowledge of sacred literature and the deepening consensus as to its authenticity as inspired Scripture continued uninterruptedly. The periods are:<\/p>\n<p>1. First Century<\/p>\n<li>2. First Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>3. Second Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>4. Third Century<\/li>\n<li>5. Fourth Century<\/li>\n<p>Again, without meaning to imply that these are clear-cut stages, it will be helpful to notice the major trends observable in each of the periods just identified. In the first period, of course, the various books were written, but they also began to be copied and disseminated among the churches. In the second, as they became more widely known and cherished for their contents, they began to be cited as authoritative. By the end of the third period, they held a recognized place alongside the OT as “Scripture,” and they began to be both translated into regional languages and made the subject of commentaries. During the third century <span>AD<\/span>, our fourth period, the collecting of books into a whole “New Testament” was underway, together with a sifting process that was separating them from other Christian literature. The final, or fifth, period finds the church fathers of the fourth century stating that conclusions regarding the canon have been reached that indicate acceptance by the whole church. Thus, in the most strict and formal sense of the word, the canon had become fixed. It remains to list in greater detail the forces and individuals that produced the written sources witnessing to this remarkable process through which, by God’s providence, we have inherited our NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Period One: First Century<\/h5>\n<p>The principle determining recognition of the authority of the canonical NT writings was established within the content of those writings themselves. There are repeated exhortations for public reading of the apostolic communications. At the close of his First Letter to the Thessalonians, possibly the first book of the NT to be written, Paul says, “I command you in the name of the Lord to read this letter to all the brothers and sisters” (1 Thes 5:27, <span>nlt<\/span>). Earlier in the same letter Paul commends their ready acceptance of his spoken word as “the word of God” (2:13), and in 1 Corinthians 14:37 he speaks similarly of his “writings,” insisting that his message be recognized as a commandment from the Lord himself. (See also Col 4:16; Rv 1:3.) In 2 Peter 3:15-16 Paul’s letters are included with “the other Scriptures.” Since Peter’s is a general letter, widespread knowledge of Paul’s letters is thereby implied. Highly indicative also is Paul’s usage in 1 Timothy 5:18. He follows up the formula “the Scriptures say” by a combined quotation about not muzzling an ox (Dt 25:4) and “the worker deserves his wages” (cf. Lk 10:7). Thus, an equivalence is implied between OT Scripture and a NT Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 95, Clement of Rome wrote to the Christians in Corinth using a free rendering of material from Matthew and Luke. He seems to be strongly influenced by Hebrews and is obviously familiar with Romans and Corinthians. There are also reflections of Ephesians, 1 Timothy, Titus, and 1 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Two: First Half of Second Century<\/h5>\n<p>One of the earliest NT manuscripts yet discovered, a fragment of John from Egypt known as the John Rylands papyrus, demonstrates how the writings of the apostle John were revered and copied by about <span>AD<\/span> 125, within 30 to 35 years of his death. There is evidence that within 30 years of the apostle’s death all the Gospels and Pauline letters were known and used in all those centers from which any evidence has come down to us. It is true that some of the smaller letters were being questioned as to their authority in some quarters for perhaps another 50 years, but this was due only to uncertainty about their authorship in those particular locales. This demonstrates that acceptance was not being imposed by the actions of councils but was rather happening spontaneously through a normal response on the part of those who had learned the facts about authorship. In those places where the churches were uncertain about the authorship or apostolic approval of certain books, acceptance was slower.<\/p>\n<p>The first three outstanding church fathers, Clement, Polycarp, and Ignatius, used the bulk of the material of the NT in a revealingly casual manner—authenticated Scriptures were being accepted as authoritative without argument. In the writings of these men only Mark (which closely parallels the material of Matthew), 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Jude are not clearly attested.<\/p>\n<p>The Epistles of Ignatius (c. <span>AD<\/span> 115) have correspondences in several places with the Gospels and seem to incorporate language from a number of the Pauline letters. The Didache (or Teaching of the Twelve), perhaps even earlier, makes references to a written Gospel. Most important is the fact that Clement, Barnabas, and Ignatius all draw a clear distinction between their own and the inspired, authoritative apostolic writings.<\/p>\n<p>It is in the Epistle of Barnabas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 130) that we first find the formula “it is written” (4:14) used in reference to a NT book (Mt 22:14). But even before this, Polycarp, who had personal acquaintance with eyewitnesses of our Lord’s ministry, used a combined OT and NT quotation. Citing Paul’s admonition in Ephesians 4:26, where the apostle quotes Psalm 4:4 and makes an addition, Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians introduces the reference by “as it is said in these Scriptures” (12:4). Then Papias, bishop of Hierapolis (c. 130–140), in a work preserved for us by Eusebius, mentions by name the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, and his use of them as the basis of exposition indicates his acceptance of them as canonical. Also around <span>AD<\/span> 140, the recently discovered Gospel of Truth (a Gnostic-oriented work probably authored by Valentinius) makes an important contribution. Its use of canonical NT sources, treating them as authoritative, is comprehensive enough to warrant the conclusion that in Rome at this period there was a NT compilation in existence corresponding very closely to our own. Citations are made from the Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul, Hebrews, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The heretic Marcion, by defining a limited canon of his own (c. 140), in effect hastened the day when the orthodox believers needed to declare themselves on this issue. Rejecting the entire OT, Marcion settled for Luke’s Gospel (eliminating chapters 1 and 2 as too Jewish) and Paul’s letters (except for the pastoral ones). Interestingly, especially in the light of Colossians 4:16, he substitutes the name “Laodiceans” for Ephesians.<\/p>\n<p>Near the end of this period, Justin Martyr, in describing the worship services of the early church, puts the apostolic writings on a par with those of the OT prophets. He states that the voice which spoke through the apostles of Christ in the NT was the same as that which spoke through the prophets—the voice of God—and the same voice that Abraham heard, responding in faith and obedience. Justin was also free in his use of “it is written” with quotations from NT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Three: Second Half of Second Century<\/h5>\n<p>Irenaeus had been privileged to begin his Christian training under Polycarp, a disciple of apostles. Then, as a presbyter in Lyons, he had association with Bishop Pothinus, whose own background also included contact with firstgeneration Christians. Irenaeus quotes from almost all the NT on the basis of its authority and asserts that the apostles were endowed with power from on high. They were, he says, “fully informed concerning all things, and had a perfect knowledge . . . having indeed all in equal measure and each one singly the Gospel of God” (<em>Against Heresies<\/em> 3.3). Irenaeus gives reasons why there should be four Gospels. “The word,” he says, “gave us the Gospel in a fourfold shape, but held together by one Spirit.” In addition to the Gospels, he makes reference also to Acts, all the letters of Paul except Philemon, 1 Peter, 1 John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>Tatian, pupil of Justin Martyr, made a harmony of the four Gospels, the <em>Diatessaron,<\/em> attesting to the equal status they had in the church by <span>AD<\/span> 170. Other “gospels” had come into existence by then, but he recognized only the four. Also dating from about 170 was the <em>Muratorian Canon.<\/em> An eighth-century copy of this document was discovered and published in 1740 by librarian L. A. Muratori. The manuscript is mutilated at both ends, but the remaining text makes it evident that Matthew and Mark were included in the now missing part. The fragment begins with Luke and John, cites Acts, 13 Pauline letters, 1 and 2 John, Jude, and Revelation. There follows a statement, “We accept only the Apocalypse of John and Peter, although some of us do not want it [Apocalypse of Peter is 2 Peter?] to be read in the Church.” The list goes on to reject by name various heretical leaders and their writings.<\/p>\n<p>Translated versions existed by this period. In the form of Syriac and Old Latin translations we secure, by <span>AD<\/span> 170, adequate witness from the extreme eastern and western branches of the church, as we might well expect from the other evidence in hand. The NT canon is represented with no additions and the omission of only one book, 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Four: Third Century<\/h5>\n<p>The outstanding Christian name of the third century is that of Origen (<span>AD<\/span> 185– 254). A prodigious scholar and interpreter, he made critical studies of the NT text (alongside his work on the <em>Hexapla<\/em>) and wrote commentaries and homilies on most of the books of the NT, emphasizing their inspiration by God.<\/p>\n<p>Dionysius of Alexandria, pupil of Origen, indicates that while the Western church accepted the book of Revelation from the first, its position in the East was variable. In the case of the Letter to the Hebrews, the situation was reversed. It proved to be more insecure in the West than in the East. When it comes to other contested books (note, incidently, that all in that category have the hindmost position in our present Bibles—Hebrews to Revelation), among the so-called “Catholic Epistles” Dionysius supports James and 2 and 3 John but not 2 Peter or Jude. In other words, even at the end of the third century there was the same lack of finality about certain books as at its beginning.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Five: Fourth Century<\/h5>\n<p>Early in this period, the picture begins to clarify. Eusebius (<span>AD<\/span> 270–340, bishop of Caesarea before 315), the great church historian, sets forth his estimate of the canon in his <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> (3.3–25). Herein he makes a straightforward statement on the status of the canon in the early part of the fourth century: (1) Universally agreed upon as canonical were the four Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul (including Hebrews, with question about his authorship), 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation. (2) Admitted by a majority, including Eusebius himself, but disputed by some were James, 2 Peter (the most strongly contested), 2 and 3 John, and Jude. (3) The Acts of Paul, the Didache, and Shepherd of Hermas were classified “spurious,” and still other writings were listed as “heretical and absurd.”<\/p>\n<p>It is in the latter half of the fourth century, however, that the NT canon finds full and final declaration. In his <em>Festal Letter<\/em> for Easter, 367, Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria included information designed to eliminate once and for all the use of certain apocryphal books. This letter, with its admonition, “Let no one add to these; let nothing be taken away,” gives us the earliest extant document that specifies our 27 books without qualification. At the close of the century, the Council of Carthage (<span>AD<\/span> 397) decreed that “aside from the canonical Scriptures nothing is to be read in church under the Name of Divine Scriptures.” This, too, lists the 27 books of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>The sudden advance of Christianity under Emperor Constantine (Edict of Milan, 313) had a great deal to do with the reception of all the NT books in the East. When he assigned Eusebius the task of preparing “fifty copies of the Divine Scriptures,” the historian, fully aware of which were the sacred books for which many believers had been willing to lay down their very lives, in effect established the standard that gave recognition to all of the once-doubtful books. In the West, of course, Jerome and Augustine were the leaders who exercised a determinitive influence. Publication of the 27 books in the Vulgate version virtually settled the matter.<\/p>\n<h5>Principles and Factors Determining the Canon<\/h5>\n<p>By its very nature, Holy Scripture, whether OT or NT, is a production given of God, not the work of human creation. The key to canonicity is divine inspiration. Therefore, the method of determination is not one of selection from a number of possible candidates (there are no other candidates, in actuality) but one of reception of authentic material and its consequent recognition by an ever-widening circle as the facts of its origin become known.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, the movement of Montanus, which was declared heretical by the church of his day (mid-second century), was an impetus toward the recognition of a closed canon of the written Word of God. He taught that the prophetic gift was permanently granted to the church and that he himself was a prophet. The pressure to deal with Montanism, therefore, intensified the search for a basic authority, and apostolic authorship or approval became recognized as the only sure standard for identifying God’s revelation. Even within the Scripture record, first-century prophets were subordinate and subject to apostolic authority (see, for example, 1 Cor 14:29-30; Eph 4:11).<\/p>\n<p>When all things were being reexamined in the Protestant Reformation, some of the Reformers sought means of reassuring themselves and their followers about the canon of Scripture. This was in some ways an unfortunate aspect of Reformation thinking, because once God in his providence had determined for his people the fixed content of Scripture, that became a fact of history and was not a repeatable process. Nevertheless, Luther established a theological test for the books of the Bible (and questioned some of them)—“Do they teach Christ?” Equally subjective, it would seem, was Calvin’s insistence that the Spirit of God bears witness to each individual Christian in any age of church history as to what is his Word and what is not.<\/p>\n<p>Actually, even for the initial acceptance of the written Word, it is neither safe nor sound (as far as Scripture or history teaches us) to say that recognition and reception was an intuitive matter. It was rather a matter of simple obedience to the known commands of Christ and his apostles. As we saw at the outset, our Lord promised (Jn 14:26; 16:13) to communicate all things necessary through his agents. The apostles were conscious of this responsibility and agency as they wrote. Paul’s explanation in 1 Corinthians 2:13 is apropos: “In telling you about these gifts we have even used the very words given to us by the Holy Spirit, not words that we as men might choose. So we use the Holy Spirit’s words to explain the Holy Spirit’s facts” (<span>tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Hence, the early church, with closer ties and greater information than is available to us today, examined the testimony of the ancients. They were able to discern which were the authentic and authoritative books by their apostolic origin. Mark’s association with Peter, and Luke’s with Paul, gave them such apostolic approval, and epistles like Hebrews and Jude were also tied in with the apostolic message and ministry. Incontrovertible consistency of doctrine in all the books, including the sometime contested ones, was perhaps a subordinate test. But historically the procedure was essentially one of acceptance and approval of those books that were vouched for by knowledgeable church leaders. Full acceptance by the original recipients followed by a continued acknowledgment and use is an essential factor in the development of the canon.<\/p>\n<p>The church’s concept of canon, derived first of all from the reverence given the OT Scriptures, rested in the conviction that the apostles were uniquely authorized to speak in the name of the one who possessed all authority—the Lord Jesus Christ. The development from there is logical and straightforward. Those who heard Jesus in person were immediately subject to his authority. He personally authenticated his words to the believers. These same believers knew that Jesus authorized his apostles to speak in his name, both during and (more significantly) after his earthly ministry. Apostolic speaking on behalf of Christ was recognized in the church, whether in personal utterance or in written form. Both the spoken word of an apostle and the letter of an apostle constituted the word of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The generation that followed that of the apostles themselves received the witness of those who knew that the apostles had the right to speak and write in the name of Christ. Consequently, the second and third generation of Christians looked back to apostolic words (writings) as the very words of Christ. This is what is really meant by canonization—recognition of the divinely authenticated Word. Hence, the believers (the church) did not establish the canon but simply bore witness to its extent by recognizing the authority of the word of Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, C<span>anon of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Those books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato, Aristotle, and Homer form a canon of Greek literature, so the NT books became the canon of Christian literature. The criteria for selecting the books in the Jewish canon (the OT) are not known but clearly had to do with their worth in the ongoing life and religion of the worshiping nation. The criteria of the selection of NT books revolved around their “apostolicity,” according to early church writers. Like those of the OT, these books were collected and preserved by local churches in the continuing process of their worship and need for authoritative guidance for Christian living. The formation of the canon was a process, rather than an event, that took several hundred years to reach finality in all parts of the Roman Empire. Local canons were the basis for comparison, and out of them eventually emerged the general canon that exists in Christendom today, although some of the Eastern churches have a NT that is slightly smaller than that accepted in the West. Judaism, as well as Christianity as a whole, believes that the Spirit of God was operative in some providential way in the production and preservation of his Word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CanonoftheOldTestament\">Canon of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament is a name that does not appear in Jewish literature. Jews prefer to call their collection of Scriptures the TANAK—an acronym formed from the first letters of <em>Torah<\/em> (Law), <em>Nevi<\/em><em>’<\/em><em>im<\/em> (Prophets), and <em>Kethubim<\/em> (Writings). In Luke 24:44 (<span>niv<\/span>), these are called the “Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (the first book of the Writings in the Hebrew Bible). Christians called their collection of writings the New Testament, or covenant, the latter term being a designation earlier used of the agreement God made with Abraham and the patriarchs, which was repeated by Christ to his apostles (Mt 26:28). Christians in the first century considered their new covenant from Christ (1 Cor 11:25) to be a continuation of the one made earlier with the patriarchs (Eph 2:12), spoken of by the prophets (Jer 31:31-34), and which was therefore called a former covenant (Heb 8:7-13; 9:1, 15-22) or in later centuries the OT. The terms “Old” and “New” do not appear in the apostolic fathers of the first and second century or in the apologists of the early- to mid-second century, but they do appear in the latter half of the second century in Justin Martyr (<em>Dialogues<\/em> 11:2), Irenaeus (<em>Against Heresies<\/em> 4.9.1), and Clement of Alexandria (<em>Stromata<\/em> 1:5). In these authors the expression referred more to the covenant itself than to the books containing it, though the transfer was eventually made. The term “canon” was not used in the OT or NT to refer to the Jewish Scriptures. The idea of limitation inherent in the word was not appropriate to the nature of religious authority in Jewish religion during the thousand years when the OT books were being written. Only the Torah was conceived as incapable of being added to or taken from (Dt 4:2). Jewish religion existed for a millennium, from Moses to Malachi, without a closed canon, i.e., an exclusive list of authoritative books. Never in their history did the people of the OT have the entire 39 books of the OT. When their canon was closed is not known. Although some questions were being asked about religious authority by rabbis at Jamnia 20 years after the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, we have our first list of 39 books produced by Melito of Sardis around <span>AD<\/span> 170. That list included no books written after the time of Malachi, unless one is disposed to date Daniel to the second century. The Prophets and the Writings were always considered secondary to the Law. Their composition and collection was a process rather than an event in the life of the people of Israel and functioned largely as a record of the nation’s response to the Law, which was so sacred that it was kept (according to rabbinical tradition: Babylonian Talmud, <em>Baba Bathra<\/em> 14a; cf. also <em>Cairo Damascus Document<\/em> 5.2) in the ark of the covenant that stood in the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle. In Deuteronomy 31:26, however, the Levites were commanded by Moses merely to put the Book of the Law beside the ark. Nevertheless, its very presence in the Holy of Holies establishes its uniqueness in relation to other OT books.<\/p>\n\n<p>The 39 books of the modern OT were originally divided into only 24, according to the uniform testimony of early Hebrew tradition. The Talmud, rabbinic literature, and probably 4 Esdras testify to this arrangement that included five books of the Law, eight Prophets, and eleven Writings (Greek—Hagiographa). Modern Hebrew Bibles reflect this tripartite arrangement that was used in the first three printed editions (Soncino, 1488; Naples, 1491–1493; Brescia, 1492–1494). The Law contained the Pentateuch in our familiar order, Genesis to Deuteronomy. The eight Prophets were Joshua, Judges, Samuel (1 and 2), Kings (1 and 2), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Minor Prophets (all 12), which were considered as one book and arranged in the same order as our English Bibles. The eleven books of Writings contained three of poetry (Ps, Prv, Jb), the Five Scrolls (Sg, Ru, Lam, Eccl, Est), which were read at the important feasts and arranged in the chronological order of their observance, and three of narrative or historical (Dn, Ezr-Neh, 1 and 2 Chr).<\/p>\n<p>Apart from authentic Jewish tradition, efforts were made to divide the books into 21, combining Ruth with Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremiah. Josephus was the first to do so, in the first century <span>AD<\/span>, but he was influenced by the Greek OT, the Septuagint. Origen observed in the early third century that this arrangement also corresponded to the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, as did Athanasius in the fourth, and others, including Jerome. It was dubiously concluded that the number of books in the Hebrew Bible had been divinely ordained to agree with the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet! Church fathers added their support to this coincidence, which became providence to them. All such efforts, however, are of Greek origin and have no support in Hebrew tradition.<\/p>\n<p>The oldest extant manuscripts of the complete OT in Hebrew are the Masoretic Texts, which are no earlier than the eighth century <span>AD<\/span>. Only manuscripts of individual books have been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Masoretic scribes apparently laid down no rules about arrangement of books because there is no uniform order of the Latter Prophets or the Writings in early Hebrew manuscripts. Nor is the situation any different in ancient Greek translations of the Hebrew. Great diversity exists in the order of books in all three of our oldest manuscripts—Codex Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus. All the early Christian authors who profess to give the order and contents of the Hebrew Bible but who do not reflect the Hebrew tripartite division are clearly dependent on the Alexandrian order reflected in these Greek editions, rather than on the Hebrew Bible. Modern Protestant Bibles follow the order of the Latin Vulgate and the content of the Hebrew. Both the Vulgate and the Septuagint (Greek translation) contained the Apocrypha, which was never accepted by the Jews. The Roman Catholic Church includes the Apocrypha in its English translations because of the influence of the Vulgate on Catholic tradition. It is considered deuterocanonical.<\/p>\n<p>Even though no uniformity of order was maintained, the Alexandrian order, reflected in the Greek manuscripts, generally arranged books according to their subject matter—narrative, history, poetry, and prophecy, with the apocryphal books appropriately interspersed into these categories. The Hebrew division was totally ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Early Hebrew Bibles divided the text into small paragraphs and larger sections somewhat akin to our paragraphs. These were indicated by spaces left between them—three letters between the small sections and nine letters between the larger ones. The number of sections is not the same in all manuscripts. Jesus probably referred to such sections in his comment concerning the “passage about the bush” (Mk 12:26). Later, liturgical needs led to further divisions of the text for the complete reading of the Law in Babylonian synagogues in one year (54 sections) and in Palestinian synagogues in three years (154 sections). These are reflected in the lectionary cycles marked in some early Hebrew Bibles.<\/p>\n<p>The division of the text into modern chapters, done in the 13th century (c. 1228) for the Latin Vulgate by Stephen Langton, was applied to the Hebrew Bible in 1518 (Bomberg Edition), but the numbers were not given to the chapters until 1571 in the text of Montanus, a Hebrew Bible with Latin interlinear translation. The verses were introduced in Bomberg’s Great Bible of 1547–48 in which every fifth verse was designated by a Hebrew numeral 1, 5, 10, and so on. Verses were inserted into the Latin Vulgate in 1555 in the small octavo edition of Stephanus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CanonoftheNewTestament\">Canon of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT was written within the period of half a century, several hundred years after the completion of the OT. Both halves of that statement would be questioned by modern critics, who would extend the time span for completion of both Testaments. The writer of this survey is confident of its truthfulness to historic fact, however, and the approach taken to canonization of both OT and NT is based solidly upon that twofold premise.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, we possess far higher certification of the OT canon than of the NT canon. We refer to the fact of our Lord’s own imprimatur by way of his use of the Hebrew Scriptures as the authoritative Word of God. Yet there is a sense in which Jesus Christ did establish the NT content or canon as well, by way of anticipation. It was he who promised, “The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” and “he will guide you into all truth” (Jn 14:26; 16:13, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>From this we can derive, in turn, the basic principle of canonicity for the NT. It is identical to that of the OT, since it narrows down to a matter of divine inspiration. Whether we think of the prophets of OT times or the apostles and their God-given associates of the New, the recognition at the very time of their writing that they were authentic spokesmen for God is what determines the intrinsic canonicity of their writing. It is altogether God’s Word only if it is God-breathed. We can be assured that the books under question were received by the church of the apostolic age precisely when they had been certified by an apostle as being thus inspired. The apparent variation, relative to geographic area, in acknowledgment of some of the NT epistles may well reflect the simple fact that this attestation was by its very nature localized at first. Conversely, that all 27 books of the now universally received NT were ultimately agreed upon is evidence that proper attestation was indeed confirmed after rigorous investigation.<\/p>\n<p>Tertullian, an outstanding Christian writer in the first two decades of the third century, was one of the first to call the Christian Scriptures the “New Testament.” That title had appeared earlier (c. 190) in a composition against Montanism, the author of which is unknown. This is significant. Its use placed the NT Scripture on a level of inspiration and authority with the OT.<\/p>\n<p>From available information, the gradual process that led to full and formal public recognition of a fixed canon of the 27 books comprising the NT takes us down into the fourth century of our era. This does not necessarily mean that these Scriptures were lacking recognition in their entirety before that time, but that a need for officially defining the canon was not pressing until then.<\/p>\n<p>Though a much shorter period of time was involved in the writing of the NT than the OT, the geographic range of its origin is far wider. This circumstance alone is sufficient to account for a lack of spontaneous or simultaneous recognition of the precise extent of the NT canon. Because of the geographic isolation of the various recipients of portions of the NT, there was bound to be some lag and uncertainty from one region to another in the acknowledgment of some of the books.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate just what did transpire in the process of canonization of the NT books, we must review the facts available to us. This will enable us to analyze <em>how<\/em> and <em>why<\/em> our early Christian forebears settled upon the 27 books in our NT.<\/p>\n<p>The historic process was a gradual and continuous one, but it will help us understand it if we subdivide the nearly three and a half centuries involved into shorter periods of time. Some speak of three major stages toward canonization. This implies, without justification, that there are readily discernible steps along the way. Others simply present a long list of the names of persons and documents involved. Such a list makes it difficult to sense any motion at all. A somewhat arbitrary breakdown into five periods will be made here, with the reminder that the spreading of the knowledge of sacred literature and the deepening consensus as to its authenticity as inspired Scripture continued uninterruptedly. The periods are:<\/p>\n<p>1. First Century<\/p>\n<li>2. First Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>3. Second Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>4. Third Century<\/li>\n<li>5. Fourth Century<\/li>\n<p>Again, without meaning to imply that these are clear-cut stages, it will be helpful to notice the major trends observable in each of the periods just identified. In the first period, of course, the various books were written, but they also began to be copied and disseminated among the churches. In the second, as they became more widely known and cherished for their contents, they began to be cited as authoritative. By the end of the third period, they held a recognized place alongside the OT as “Scripture,” and they began to be both translated into regional languages and made the subject of commentaries. During the third century <span>AD<\/span>, our fourth period, the collecting of books into a whole “New Testament” was underway, together with a sifting process that was separating them from other Christian literature. The final, or fifth, period finds the church fathers of the fourth century stating that conclusions regarding the canon have been reached that indicate acceptance by the whole church. Thus, in the most strict and formal sense of the word, the canon had become fixed. It remains to list in greater detail the forces and individuals that produced the written sources witnessing to this remarkable process through which, by God’s providence, we have inherited our NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Period One: First Century<\/h5>\n<p>The principle determining recognition of the authority of the canonical NT writings was established within the content of those writings themselves. There are repeated exhortations for public reading of the apostolic communications. At the close of his First Letter to the Thessalonians, possibly the first book of the NT to be written, Paul says, “I command you in the name of the Lord to read this letter to all the brothers and sisters” (1 Thes 5:27, <span>nlt<\/span>). Earlier in the same letter Paul commends their ready acceptance of his spoken word as “the word of God” (2:13), and in 1 Corinthians 14:37 he speaks similarly of his “writings,” insisting that his message be recognized as a commandment from the Lord himself. (See also Col 4:16; Rv 1:3.) In 2 Peter 3:15-16 Paul’s letters are included with “the other Scriptures.” Since Peter’s is a general letter, widespread knowledge of Paul’s letters is thereby implied. Highly indicative also is Paul’s usage in 1 Timothy 5:18. He follows up the formula “the Scriptures say” by a combined quotation about not muzzling an ox (Dt 25:4) and “the worker deserves his wages” (cf. Lk 10:7). Thus, an equivalence is implied between OT Scripture and a NT Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 95, Clement of Rome wrote to the Christians in Corinth using a free rendering of material from Matthew and Luke. He seems to be strongly influenced by Hebrews and is obviously familiar with Romans and Corinthians. There are also reflections of Ephesians, 1 Timothy, Titus, and 1 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Two: First Half of Second Century<\/h5>\n<p>One of the earliest NT manuscripts yet discovered, a fragment of John from Egypt known as the John Rylands papyrus, demonstrates how the writings of the apostle John were revered and copied by about <span>AD<\/span> 125, within 30 to 35 years of his death. There is evidence that within 30 years of the apostle’s death all the Gospels and Pauline letters were known and used in all those centers from which any evidence has come down to us. It is true that some of the smaller letters were being questioned as to their authority in some quarters for perhaps another 50 years, but this was due only to uncertainty about their authorship in those particular locales. This demonstrates that acceptance was not being imposed by the actions of councils but was rather happening spontaneously through a normal response on the part of those who had learned the facts about authorship. In those places where the churches were uncertain about the authorship or apostolic approval of certain books, acceptance was slower.<\/p>\n<p>The first three outstanding church fathers, Clement, Polycarp, and Ignatius, used the bulk of the material of the NT in a revealingly casual manner—authenticated Scriptures were being accepted as authoritative without argument. In the writings of these men only Mark (which closely parallels the material of Matthew), 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Jude are not clearly attested.<\/p>\n<p>The Epistles of Ignatius (c. <span>AD<\/span> 115) have correspondences in several places with the Gospels and seem to incorporate language from a number of the Pauline letters. The Didache (or Teaching of the Twelve), perhaps even earlier, makes references to a written Gospel. Most important is the fact that Clement, Barnabas, and Ignatius all draw a clear distinction between their own and the inspired, authoritative apostolic writings.<\/p>\n<p>It is in the Epistle of Barnabas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 130) that we first find the formula “it is written” (4:14) used in reference to a NT book (Mt 22:14). But even before this, Polycarp, who had personal acquaintance with eyewitnesses of our Lord’s ministry, used a combined OT and NT quotation. Citing Paul’s admonition in Ephesians 4:26, where the apostle quotes Psalm 4:4 and makes an addition, Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians introduces the reference by “as it is said in these Scriptures” (12:4). Then Papias, bishop of Hierapolis (c. 130–140), in a work preserved for us by Eusebius, mentions by name the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, and his use of them as the basis of exposition indicates his acceptance of them as canonical. Also around <span>AD<\/span> 140, the recently discovered Gospel of Truth (a Gnostic-oriented work probably authored by Valentinius) makes an important contribution. Its use of canonical NT sources, treating them as authoritative, is comprehensive enough to warrant the conclusion that in Rome at this period there was a NT compilation in existence corresponding very closely to our own. Citations are made from the Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul, Hebrews, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The heretic Marcion, by defining a limited canon of his own (c. 140), in effect hastened the day when the orthodox believers needed to declare themselves on this issue. Rejecting the entire OT, Marcion settled for Luke’s Gospel (eliminating chapters 1 and 2 as too Jewish) and Paul’s letters (except for the pastoral ones). Interestingly, especially in the light of Colossians 4:16, he substitutes the name “Laodiceans” for Ephesians.<\/p>\n<p>Near the end of this period, Justin Martyr, in describing the worship services of the early church, puts the apostolic writings on a par with those of the OT prophets. He states that the voice which spoke through the apostles of Christ in the NT was the same as that which spoke through the prophets—the voice of God—and the same voice that Abraham heard, responding in faith and obedience. Justin was also free in his use of “it is written” with quotations from NT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Three: Second Half of Second Century<\/h5>\n<p>Irenaeus had been privileged to begin his Christian training under Polycarp, a disciple of apostles. Then, as a presbyter in Lyons, he had association with Bishop Pothinus, whose own background also included contact with firstgeneration Christians. Irenaeus quotes from almost all the NT on the basis of its authority and asserts that the apostles were endowed with power from on high. They were, he says, “fully informed concerning all things, and had a perfect knowledge . . . having indeed all in equal measure and each one singly the Gospel of God” (<em>Against Heresies<\/em> 3.3). Irenaeus gives reasons why there should be four Gospels. “The word,” he says, “gave us the Gospel in a fourfold shape, but held together by one Spirit.” In addition to the Gospels, he makes reference also to Acts, all the letters of Paul except Philemon, 1 Peter, 1 John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>Tatian, pupil of Justin Martyr, made a harmony of the four Gospels, the <em>Diatessaron,<\/em> attesting to the equal status they had in the church by <span>AD<\/span> 170. Other “gospels” had come into existence by then, but he recognized only the four. Also dating from about 170 was the <em>Muratorian Canon.<\/em> An eighth-century copy of this document was discovered and published in 1740 by librarian L. A. Muratori. The manuscript is mutilated at both ends, but the remaining text makes it evident that Matthew and Mark were included in the now missing part. The fragment begins with Luke and John, cites Acts, 13 Pauline letters, 1 and 2 John, Jude, and Revelation. There follows a statement, “We accept only the Apocalypse of John and Peter, although some of us do not want it [Apocalypse of Peter is 2 Peter?] to be read in the Church.” The list goes on to reject by name various heretical leaders and their writings.<\/p>\n<p>Translated versions existed by this period. In the form of Syriac and Old Latin translations we secure, by <span>AD<\/span> 170, adequate witness from the extreme eastern and western branches of the church, as we might well expect from the other evidence in hand. The NT canon is represented with no additions and the omission of only one book, 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Four: Third Century<\/h5>\n<p>The outstanding Christian name of the third century is that of Origen (<span>AD<\/span> 185– 254). A prodigious scholar and interpreter, he made critical studies of the NT text (alongside his work on the <em>Hexapla<\/em>) and wrote commentaries and homilies on most of the books of the NT, emphasizing their inspiration by God.<\/p>\n<p>Dionysius of Alexandria, pupil of Origen, indicates that while the Western church accepted the book of Revelation from the first, its position in the East was variable. In the case of the Letter to the Hebrews, the situation was reversed. It proved to be more insecure in the West than in the East. When it comes to other contested books (note, incidently, that all in that category have the hindmost position in our present Bibles—Hebrews to Revelation), among the so-called “Catholic Epistles” Dionysius supports James and 2 and 3 John but not 2 Peter or Jude. In other words, even at the end of the third century there was the same lack of finality about certain books as at its beginning.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Five: Fourth Century<\/h5>\n<p>Early in this period, the picture begins to clarify. Eusebius (<span>AD<\/span> 270–340, bishop of Caesarea before 315), the great church historian, sets forth his estimate of the canon in his <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> (3.3–25). Herein he makes a straightforward statement on the status of the canon in the early part of the fourth century: (1) Universally agreed upon as canonical were the four Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul (including Hebrews, with question about his authorship), 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation. (2) Admitted by a majority, including Eusebius himself, but disputed by some were James, 2 Peter (the most strongly contested), 2 and 3 John, and Jude. (3) The Acts of Paul, the Didache, and Shepherd of Hermas were classified “spurious,” and still other writings were listed as “heretical and absurd.”<\/p>\n<p>It is in the latter half of the fourth century, however, that the NT canon finds full and final declaration. In his <em>Festal Letter<\/em> for Easter, 367, Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria included information designed to eliminate once and for all the use of certain apocryphal books. This letter, with its admonition, “Let no one add to these; let nothing be taken away,” gives us the earliest extant document that specifies our 27 books without qualification. At the close of the century, the Council of Carthage (<span>AD<\/span> 397) decreed that “aside from the canonical Scriptures nothing is to be read in church under the Name of Divine Scriptures.” This, too, lists the 27 books of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>The sudden advance of Christianity under Emperor Constantine (Edict of Milan, 313) had a great deal to do with the reception of all the NT books in the East. When he assigned Eusebius the task of preparing “fifty copies of the Divine Scriptures,” the historian, fully aware of which were the sacred books for which many believers had been willing to lay down their very lives, in effect established the standard that gave recognition to all of the once-doubtful books. In the West, of course, Jerome and Augustine were the leaders who exercised a determinitive influence. Publication of the 27 books in the Vulgate version virtually settled the matter.<\/p>\n<h5>Principles and Factors Determining the Canon<\/h5>\n<p>By its very nature, Holy Scripture, whether OT or NT, is a production given of God, not the work of human creation. The key to canonicity is divine inspiration. Therefore, the method of determination is not one of selection from a number of possible candidates (there are no other candidates, in actuality) but one of reception of authentic material and its consequent recognition by an ever-widening circle as the facts of its origin become known.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, the movement of Montanus, which was declared heretical by the church of his day (mid-second century), was an impetus toward the recognition of a closed canon of the written Word of God. He taught that the prophetic gift was permanently granted to the church and that he himself was a prophet. The pressure to deal with Montanism, therefore, intensified the search for a basic authority, and apostolic authorship or approval became recognized as the only sure standard for identifying God’s revelation. Even within the Scripture record, first-century prophets were subordinate and subject to apostolic authority (see, for example, 1 Cor 14:29-30; Eph 4:11).<\/p>\n<p>When all things were being reexamined in the Protestant Reformation, some of the Reformers sought means of reassuring themselves and their followers about the canon of Scripture. This was in some ways an unfortunate aspect of Reformation thinking, because once God in his providence had determined for his people the fixed content of Scripture, that became a fact of history and was not a repeatable process. Nevertheless, Luther established a theological test for the books of the Bible (and questioned some of them)—“Do they teach Christ?” Equally subjective, it would seem, was Calvin’s insistence that the Spirit of God bears witness to each individual Christian in any age of church history as to what is his Word and what is not.<\/p>\n<p>Actually, even for the initial acceptance of the written Word, it is neither safe nor sound (as far as Scripture or history teaches us) to say that recognition and reception was an intuitive matter. It was rather a matter of simple obedience to the known commands of Christ and his apostles. As we saw at the outset, our Lord promised (Jn 14:26; 16:13) to communicate all things necessary through his agents. The apostles were conscious of this responsibility and agency as they wrote. Paul’s explanation in 1 Corinthians 2:13 is apropos: “In telling you about these gifts we have even used the very words given to us by the Holy Spirit, not words that we as men might choose. So we use the Holy Spirit’s words to explain the Holy Spirit’s facts” (<span>tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Hence, the early church, with closer ties and greater information than is available to us today, examined the testimony of the ancients. They were able to discern which were the authentic and authoritative books by their apostolic origin. Mark’s association with Peter, and Luke’s with Paul, gave them such apostolic approval, and epistles like Hebrews and Jude were also tied in with the apostolic message and ministry. Incontrovertible consistency of doctrine in all the books, including the sometime contested ones, was perhaps a subordinate test. But historically the procedure was essentially one of acceptance and approval of those books that were vouched for by knowledgeable church leaders. Full acceptance by the original recipients followed by a continued acknowledgment and use is an essential factor in the development of the canon.<\/p>\n<p>The church’s concept of canon, derived first of all from the reverence given the OT Scriptures, rested in the conviction that the apostles were uniquely authorized to speak in the name of the one who possessed all authority—the Lord Jesus Christ. The development from there is logical and straightforward. Those who heard Jesus in person were immediately subject to his authority. He personally authenticated his words to the believers. These same believers knew that Jesus authorized his apostles to speak in his name, both during and (more significantly) after his earthly ministry. Apostolic speaking on behalf of Christ was recognized in the church, whether in personal utterance or in written form. Both the spoken word of an apostle and the letter of an apostle constituted the word of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The generation that followed that of the apostles themselves received the witness of those who knew that the apostles had the right to speak and write in the name of Christ. Consequently, the second and third generation of Christians looked back to apostolic words (writings) as the very words of Christ. This is what is really meant by canonization—recognition of the divinely authenticated Word. Hence, the believers (the church) did not establish the canon but simply bore witness to its extent by recognizing the authority of the word of Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Canon of the Those books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century AD, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Canon of the Those books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century AD, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16857,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hospitality","title_en":"Hospitality","content_ro":"<h3>HOSPITALITY<\/h3>\n<p>Biblical concept often used with the terms “guest,” “stranger,” and “sojourner.” It is useful to limit the meaning of “hospitality” to benevolence done to those outside one’s normal circle of friends, as is implied in the literal meaning of the Greek word meaning “love of strangers.” Although the concept is thoroughly endorsed in the Bible, it is clearly found in nonbiblical cultures as well, especially among the nomadic peoples, where definite obligations to provide food, shelter, and protection are recognized.<\/p>\n<p>The normal exercise of hospitality in the OT can be seen in the examples of Abraham and the three visitors (Gn 18:2-8, 16), Laban’s reception of Abraham’s servant (24:15-61), and Manoah’s treatment of the angel (Jgs 13:15). But there are also cases in which the host felt compelled to take extreme steps to protect his guest, even to the harm of his own family (Gn 19:1-8; Jgs 19:14-24). The hospitality of the Shunammite family is also noteworthy, although Elisha was no stranger to them (2 Kgs 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>According to the NT, Jesus relied on the general practice of hospitality in sending out the disciples (Lk 10:7), as well as in his own travels. As the gospel was spread by traveling missionaries, Christians were commended for entertaining them in their homes (Heb 13:2; 1 Pt 4:9; 3 Jn 1:5-8). Church leaders must not exempt themselves from this ministry (1 Tm 3:2; Ti 1:8); to do so is grounds for judgment (Mt 25:43-46).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Foreigner.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOSPITALITY<\/h3>\n<p>Biblical concept often used with the terms “guest,” “stranger,” and “sojourner.” It is useful to limit the meaning of “hospitality” to benevolence done to those outside one’s normal circle of friends, as is implied in the literal meaning of the Greek word meaning “love of strangers.” Although the concept is thoroughly endorsed in the Bible, it is clearly found in nonbiblical cultures as well, especially among the nomadic peoples, where definite obligations to provide food, shelter, and protection are recognized.<\/p>\n<p>The normal exercise of hospitality in the OT can be seen in the examples of Abraham and the three visitors (Gn 18:2-8, 16), Laban’s reception of Abraham’s servant (24:15-61), and Manoah’s treatment of the angel (Jgs 13:15). But there are also cases in which the host felt compelled to take extreme steps to protect his guest, even to the harm of his own family (Gn 19:1-8; Jgs 19:14-24). The hospitality of the Shunammite family is also noteworthy, although Elisha was no stranger to them (2 Kgs 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>According to the NT, Jesus relied on the general practice of hospitality in sending out the disciples (Lk 10:7), as well as in his own travels. As the gospel was spread by traveling missionaries, Christians were commended for entertaining them in their homes (Heb 13:2; 1 Pt 4:9; 3 Jn 1:5-8). Church leaders must not exempt themselves from this ministry (1 Tm 3:2; Ti 1:8); to do so is grounds for judgment (Mt 25:43-46).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Foreigner.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOSPITALITY Biblical concept often used with the terms “guest,” “stranger,” and “sojourner.” It is useful to limit the meaning of “hospitality” to benevolence done to those outside one’s normal circle of friends, as is implied in the literal meaning of the Greek word meaning “love of strangers.” Although the concept is thoroughly endorsed in the Bible, it is clearly found in nonbiblical cultures as well, especially among the nomadic peoples, where definite obligations to provide food, shelter...","summary_en":"HOSPITALITY Biblical concept often used with the terms “guest,” “stranger,” and “sojourner.” It is useful to limit the meaning of “hospitality” to benevolence done to those outside one’s normal circle of friends, as is implied in the literal meaning of the Greek word meaning “love of strangers.” Although the concept is thoroughly endorsed in the Bible, it is clearly found in nonbiblical cultures as well, especially among the nomadic peoples, where definite obligations to provide food, shelter...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38097,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Wages","title_en":"Wages","content_ro":"<h3>WAGES<\/h3>\n<p>Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in capturing the city of Tyre (Ez 29:18-20).<\/p>\n<p>Usually wages were agreed upon by employer and employee (Gn 29:15-19; Mt 20:2), but sometimes the pay was at the discretion of the employer (Mt 20:4). A fair wage for honest work is a biblical principle (Lk 10:7; 1 Tm 5:18). The Lord established laws to cover this principle and judged those who violated it. Wages were to be paid promptly (Lv 19:13); the holding back of wages is condemned in the Scripture (Mal 3:5; Jas 5:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Wages were often a source of discontent and dispute between employer and employee. When soldiers came to John the Baptist to be baptized and asked about their future conduct, he urged them to be content with their wages (Lk 3:14). Jacob and Laban had disagreements about wages and twice Jacob complained, “You have changed my wages ten times” (Gn 31:7, 41).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible also speaks of ill-gotten wages. The wages of a prostitute could not be brought into the house of the Lord (Dt 23:18), and people are warned against the error of Balaam, who corrupted Israel because he “loved the wages of unrighteousness” (2 Pt 2:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking; Poor, The; Riches; Work.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WAGES<\/h3>\n<p>Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in capturing the city of Tyre (Ez 29:18-20).<\/p>\n<p>Usually wages were agreed upon by employer and employee (Gn 29:15-19; Mt 20:2), but sometimes the pay was at the discretion of the employer (Mt 20:4). A fair wage for honest work is a biblical principle (Lk 10:7; 1 Tm 5:18). The Lord established laws to cover this principle and judged those who violated it. Wages were to be paid promptly (Lv 19:13); the holding back of wages is condemned in the Scripture (Mal 3:5; Jas 5:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Wages were often a source of discontent and dispute between employer and employee. When soldiers came to John the Baptist to be baptized and asked about their future conduct, he urged them to be content with their wages (Lk 3:14). Jacob and Laban had disagreements about wages and twice Jacob complained, “You have changed my wages ten times” (Gn 31:7, 41).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible also speaks of ill-gotten wages. The wages of a prostitute could not be brought into the house of the Lord (Dt 23:18), and people are warned against the error of Balaam, who corrupted Israel because he “loved the wages of unrighteousness” (2 Pt 2:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking; Poor, The; Riches; Work.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WAGES Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in captu...","summary_en":"WAGES Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in captu...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38659,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Work","title_en":"Work","content_ro":"<h3>WORK<\/h3>\n<p>A term referring either to God’s activity or to people’s regular occupation or employment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheValueofWork\">The Value of Work<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s positive outlook on work is rooted in its teaching about God. Unlike other ancient religious writings, which regarded creation as something beneath the dignity of the Supreme Being, Scripture unashamedly describes God as a worker. Like a manual laborer, he made the universe as “the work of his fingers” (Ps 8:3). He worked with his raw material just as a potter works with the clay (Is 45:9). The intricate development of the unborn child in the womb and the vast, magnificent spread of the sky both display his supreme craftsmanship (Pss 139:13-16; 19:1). In fact, all creation bears witness to his wisdom and skill (104:24). The almighty Creator even had his rest day (Gn 2:2-3) and enjoyed job satisfaction when surveying his achievements at the end of the week (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>This vivid biblical description of a working God reaches its climax with the incarnation of Jesus. The “work” that Jesus was given to do (Jn 4:34) was, of course, the unique task of redemption. But he was also a worker in the ordinary sense. His contemporaries knew him as “a carpenter” (Mk 6:3). In NT times carpentry and joinery were muscle-building trades. So the Jesus who stormed through the temple, overturning tables and driving out the men and animals (Jn 2:14-16), was no pale weakling but a workingman whose hands had been hardened by years of toil with the ax, saw, and hammer. Hard, physical labor was not beneath the dignity of the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>If the Bible’s teaching about God enhances work’s dignity, its account of mankind’s creation gives all human labor the mark of normality. God “took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to till it and keep it” (Gn 2:15). And God’s first command, to “fill the earth and subdue it” (1:28), implied a great deal of work for both man and woman. In an important sense, people today are obeying that command of their Creator when they do their daily work, whether they acknowledge him or not. Work did not, therefore, arrive in the world as a direct result of the fall into sin (though sin did spoil working conditions, 3:17-19). Work was planned by God from the dawn of history for mankind’s good—as natural to men and women as sunset is to day (Ps 104:19-23).<\/p>\n<p>With this firm emphasis on the dignity and normality of labor, it is no surprise to find that Scripture strongly condemns idleness. “Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise” (Prv 6:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul is equally blunt: “If any one will not work, let him not eat” (2 Thes 3:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). He set a good example (Acts 20:33-35; 1 Thes 2:9). Those who refuse to work, he insists, even for spiritual reasons, earn no respect from non-Christian onlookers by depending on others to pay their bills (1 Thes 4:11-12). Wage earners, on the other hand, have the material resources of Christian service (Eph 4:28).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Vocations\">Vocations<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times the Greeks and Romans catalogued jobs according to importance or desirability. Routine manual labor, for example, was considered inferior to work involving mental activity.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish teaching contrasts strongly with this attitude. “Hate not laborious work,” taught the rabbis (Ecclus 7:15). Even the scholar had to spend some time in manual work. A few trades, like that of the tanner, were regarded as undesirable (a taboo broken very quickly by the early church—see Acts 9:43), but there is no indication in the Bible that some jobs are more worthwhile than others in God’s sight. The Lord calls craftsmen into his service (Ex 31:1-11), just as much as prophets (Is 6:8-9). So Amos was summoned from his fruit-picking to prophesy (Am 7:14-15), but with no suggestion that he was being promoted to a superior role. The important thing was not the nature of the occupation but the readiness to obey God’s call and to witness faithfully to him, whatever the job.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible has some poignant things to say about the relationship between employer and employee. The OT prophets voice the strongest criticism. God is especially concerned to see that the weak get justice (Is 1:17; Mi 6:8). So, naturally, his spokesmen declare his anger when employers exploit their laborers and cheat them of their wages (Jer 22:13; Mal 3:5; cf. Jas 5:4). A person who wants to please God must “stop oppressing those who work for [him] and treat them fairly and give them what they earn” (Is 58:6, <span>tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In Bible times, the scales were weighted heavily in favor of the employer. But Scripture is not blind to the existence of selfish, greedy employees. Every worker deserves a just wage (Lk 10:7), but those with special power must not try to increase their pay by threats and violence (3:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorkingforChrist\">Working for Christ<\/p>\n<p>God is a working God who is pleased when his people work hard and conscientiously. That conviction lies at the heart of the Bible’s teaching about Christian attitudes toward secular employment. And quite naturally, the NT extends the same positive emphasis to cover all Christian service, paid or unpaid. The world is God’s harvest field, said Jesus, waiting for Christian reapers to move in and evangelize (Mt 9:37-38). Paul used the same agricultural illustration and added another from the building trade to describe the Lord’s work of evangelism and teaching (1 Cor 3:6-15). Church leaders must work especially hard, he said (1 Thes 5:12), to stimulate <em>all<\/em> God’s people to be involved in the Lord’s work (1 Cor 15:58). All Christians should see themselves as “God’s coworkers” (3:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORK<\/h3>\n<p>A term referring either to God’s activity or to people’s regular occupation or employment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheValueofWork\">The Value of Work<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s positive outlook on work is rooted in its teaching about God. Unlike other ancient religious writings, which regarded creation as something beneath the dignity of the Supreme Being, Scripture unashamedly describes God as a worker. Like a manual laborer, he made the universe as “the work of his fingers” (Ps 8:3). He worked with his raw material just as a potter works with the clay (Is 45:9). The intricate development of the unborn child in the womb and the vast, magnificent spread of the sky both display his supreme craftsmanship (Pss 139:13-16; 19:1). In fact, all creation bears witness to his wisdom and skill (104:24). The almighty Creator even had his rest day (Gn 2:2-3) and enjoyed job satisfaction when surveying his achievements at the end of the week (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>This vivid biblical description of a working God reaches its climax with the incarnation of Jesus. The “work” that Jesus was given to do (Jn 4:34) was, of course, the unique task of redemption. But he was also a worker in the ordinary sense. His contemporaries knew him as “a carpenter” (Mk 6:3). In NT times carpentry and joinery were muscle-building trades. So the Jesus who stormed through the temple, overturning tables and driving out the men and animals (Jn 2:14-16), was no pale weakling but a workingman whose hands had been hardened by years of toil with the ax, saw, and hammer. Hard, physical labor was not beneath the dignity of the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>If the Bible’s teaching about God enhances work’s dignity, its account of mankind’s creation gives all human labor the mark of normality. God “took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to till it and keep it” (Gn 2:15). And God’s first command, to “fill the earth and subdue it” (1:28), implied a great deal of work for both man and woman. In an important sense, people today are obeying that command of their Creator when they do their daily work, whether they acknowledge him or not. Work did not, therefore, arrive in the world as a direct result of the fall into sin (though sin did spoil working conditions, 3:17-19). Work was planned by God from the dawn of history for mankind’s good—as natural to men and women as sunset is to day (Ps 104:19-23).<\/p>\n<p>With this firm emphasis on the dignity and normality of labor, it is no surprise to find that Scripture strongly condemns idleness. “Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise” (Prv 6:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul is equally blunt: “If any one will not work, let him not eat” (2 Thes 3:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). He set a good example (Acts 20:33-35; 1 Thes 2:9). Those who refuse to work, he insists, even for spiritual reasons, earn no respect from non-Christian onlookers by depending on others to pay their bills (1 Thes 4:11-12). Wage earners, on the other hand, have the material resources of Christian service (Eph 4:28).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Vocations\">Vocations<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times the Greeks and Romans catalogued jobs according to importance or desirability. Routine manual labor, for example, was considered inferior to work involving mental activity.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish teaching contrasts strongly with this attitude. “Hate not laborious work,” taught the rabbis (Ecclus 7:15). Even the scholar had to spend some time in manual work. A few trades, like that of the tanner, were regarded as undesirable (a taboo broken very quickly by the early church—see Acts 9:43), but there is no indication in the Bible that some jobs are more worthwhile than others in God’s sight. The Lord calls craftsmen into his service (Ex 31:1-11), just as much as prophets (Is 6:8-9). So Amos was summoned from his fruit-picking to prophesy (Am 7:14-15), but with no suggestion that he was being promoted to a superior role. The important thing was not the nature of the occupation but the readiness to obey God’s call and to witness faithfully to him, whatever the job.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible has some poignant things to say about the relationship between employer and employee. The OT prophets voice the strongest criticism. God is especially concerned to see that the weak get justice (Is 1:17; Mi 6:8). So, naturally, his spokesmen declare his anger when employers exploit their laborers and cheat them of their wages (Jer 22:13; Mal 3:5; cf. Jas 5:4). A person who wants to please God must “stop oppressing those who work for [him] and treat them fairly and give them what they earn” (Is 58:6, <span>tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In Bible times, the scales were weighted heavily in favor of the employer. But Scripture is not blind to the existence of selfish, greedy employees. Every worker deserves a just wage (Lk 10:7), but those with special power must not try to increase their pay by threats and violence (3:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorkingforChrist\">Working for Christ<\/p>\n<p>God is a working God who is pleased when his people work hard and conscientiously. That conviction lies at the heart of the Bible’s teaching about Christian attitudes toward secular employment. And quite naturally, the NT extends the same positive emphasis to cover all Christian service, paid or unpaid. The world is God’s harvest field, said Jesus, waiting for Christian reapers to move in and evangelize (Mt 9:37-38). Paul used the same agricultural illustration and added another from the building trade to describe the Lord’s work of evangelism and teaching (1 Cor 3:6-15). Church leaders must work especially hard, he said (1 Thes 5:12), to stimulate <em>all<\/em> God’s people to be involved in the Lord’s work (1 Cor 15:58). All Christians should see themselves as “God’s coworkers” (3:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORK A term referring either to God’s activity or to people’s regular occupation or employment. The Value of Work The Bible’s positive outlook on work is rooted in its teaching about God. Unlike other ancient religious writings, which regarded creation as something beneath the dignity of the Supreme Being, Scripture unashamedly describes God as a worker. Like a manual laborer, he made the universe as “the work of his fingers” (Ps 8:3). He worked with his raw material just as a potter works wi...","summary_en":"WORK A term referring either to God’s activity or to people’s regular occupation or employment. The Value of Work The Bible’s positive outlook on work is rooted in its teaching about God. Unlike other ancient religious writings, which regarded creation as something beneath the dignity of the Supreme Being, Scripture unashamedly describes God as a worker. Like a manual laborer, he made the universe as “the work of his fingers” (Ps 8:3). He worked with his raw material just as a potter works wi...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55877,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Don’t move around from home to home:<\/em> See study note on 9:4. • <em>because those who work deserve their pay:<\/em> Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Don’t move around from home to home:<\/em> See study note on 9:4. • <em>because those who work deserve their pay:<\/em> Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:7 Don’t move around from home to home: See study note on 9:4. • because those who work deserve their pay: Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).","summary_en":"10:7 Don’t move around from home to home: See study note on 9:4. • because those who work deserve their pay: Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83503,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Don’t move around from home to home:<\/em> See study note on 9:4. • <em>because those who work deserve their pay:<\/em> Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Don’t move around from home to home:<\/em> See study note on 9:4. • <em>because those who work deserve their pay:<\/em> Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:7 Don’t move around from home to home: See study note on 9:4. • because those who work deserve their pay: Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).","summary_en":"10:7 Don’t move around from home to home: See study note on 9:4. • because those who work deserve their pay: Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111129,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Don’t move around from home to home:<\/em> See study note on 9:4. • <em>because those who work deserve their pay:<\/em> Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Don’t move around from home to home:<\/em> See study note on 9:4. • <em>because those who work deserve their pay:<\/em> Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:7 Don’t move around from home to home: See study note on 9:4. • because those who work deserve their pay: Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).","summary_en":"10:7 Don’t move around from home to home: See study note on 9:4. • because those who work deserve their pay: Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138755,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Don’t move around from home to home:<\/em> See study note on 9:4. • <em>because those who work deserve their pay:<\/em> Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Don’t move around from home to home:<\/em> See study note on 9:4. • <em>because those who work deserve their pay:<\/em> Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:7 Don’t move around from home to home: See study note on 9:4. • because those who work deserve their pay: Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).","summary_en":"10:7 Don’t move around from home to home: See study note on 9:4. • because those who work deserve their pay: Those who minister for Jesus should receive compensation from those they serve (see also 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":15643,"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}],"9":[{"id":21902,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55878,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:9","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • <em>Heal the sick:<\/em> Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the <em>Kingdom of God<\/em> was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • <em>Heal the sick:<\/em> Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the <em>Kingdom of God<\/em> was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:9 The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • Heal the sick: Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the Kingdom of God was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).","summary_en":"10:9 The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • Heal the sick: Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the Kingdom of God was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83504,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:9","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • <em>Heal the sick:<\/em> Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the <em>Kingdom of God<\/em> was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • <em>Heal the sick:<\/em> Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the <em>Kingdom of God<\/em> was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:9 The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • Heal the sick: Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the Kingdom of God was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).","summary_en":"10:9 The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • Heal the sick: Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the Kingdom of God was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111130,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:9","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • <em>Heal the sick:<\/em> Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the <em>Kingdom of God<\/em> was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • <em>Heal the sick:<\/em> Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the <em>Kingdom of God<\/em> was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:9 The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • Heal the sick: Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the Kingdom of God was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).","summary_en":"10:9 The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • Heal the sick: Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the Kingdom of God was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138756,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:9","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • <em>Heal the sick:<\/em> Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the <em>Kingdom of God<\/em> was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • <em>Heal the sick:<\/em> Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the <em>Kingdom of God<\/em> was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:9 The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • Heal the sick: Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the Kingdom of God was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).","summary_en":"10:9 The same mission was given to the Twelve (see 9:1). • Heal the sick: Healing was a sign of salvation (Isa 29:18-19; 35:5); it was physical evidence that the Kingdom of God was present (see study note on Luke 7:22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":55879,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:11","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:11<\/strong> See study note on 9:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:11<\/strong> See study note on 9:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:11 See study note on 9:5.","summary_en":"10:11 See study note on 9:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83505,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:11","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:11<\/strong> See study note on 9:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:11<\/strong> See study note on 9:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:11 See study note on 9:5.","summary_en":"10:11 See study note on 9:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111131,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:11","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:11<\/strong> See study note on 9:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:11<\/strong> See study note on 9:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:11 See study note on 9:5.","summary_en":"10:11 See study note on 9:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138757,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:11","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:11<\/strong> See study note on 9:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:11<\/strong> See study note on 9:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:11 See study note on 9:5.","summary_en":"10:11 See study note on 9:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":35713,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sodom and Gomorrah","title_en":"Sodom and Gomorrah","content_ro":"<h3>SODOM AND GOMORRAH<\/h3>\n<p>Two of the “cities of the plain [valley]” referred to in Genesis 13:12. There were five cities—Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Bela or Zoar (Gn 14:2)—all situated in the valley of Siddim (i.e., the Salt Sea). Of these, Sodom is mentioned most frequently in Genesis—36 times in all, of which 16 references are to Sodom alone. Sodom became known in biblical literature as the supreme example of a wicked city, and its destruction (19:24) was used as a warning of God’s judgment in other biblical writings (Dt 29:23; Is 1:9-10; Jer 23:14; 49:18; Lam 4:6; Am 4:11; Zep 2:9). The story of Sodom’s destruction found its place also in the NT (Mt 10:15; Lk 10:12; 17:29; Rom 9:29; 2 Pt 2:6; Jude 1:7; Rv 11:8).<\/p>\n\n<p>The primary story of Sodom and Gomorrah occurs in Genesis 18 and 19, although the biblical interest in the city begins in chapter 13 with the decision of Lot, Abraham’s nephew, to settle in the Jordan Valley, in the vicinity of Sodom, among people who were notorious sinners. It becomes clear that one of Sodom’s most grievous sins was sexual perversion, especially homosexuality. Lot’s offer of his virgin daughters to the men of Sodom to turn their attention away from his heavenly visitors is an indication of the demoralizing influence of the city.<\/p>\n<p>Four rulers from the East descended on the region of Sodom and Gomorrah sometime after Lot settled there and subdued the area. They returned 14 years later to quell a rebellion (Gn 14:1-5). Among their captives was Lot, who was (subsequently) rescued by Abraham. The evil of Sodom and Gomorrah was so great that the Lord determined to destroy them. Abraham pleaded for mercy for them if ten righteous men could be found (18:20-33). The two heavenly visitors who went from Abraham to Sodom found Lot sitting in the gate of Sodom (19:1), revealed God’s intentions to him, and persuaded Lot and his wife and two daughters to flee the city. Then the Lord rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah. The next morning Abraham saw the smoke from the destroyed cities rising like the smoke of a furnace.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of the Plain.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SODOM AND GOMORRAH<\/h3>\n<p>Two of the “cities of the plain [valley]” referred to in Genesis 13:12. There were five cities—Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Bela or Zoar (Gn 14:2)—all situated in the valley of Siddim (i.e., the Salt Sea). Of these, Sodom is mentioned most frequently in Genesis—36 times in all, of which 16 references are to Sodom alone. Sodom became known in biblical literature as the supreme example of a wicked city, and its destruction (19:24) was used as a warning of God’s judgment in other biblical writings (Dt 29:23; Is 1:9-10; Jer 23:14; 49:18; Lam 4:6; Am 4:11; Zep 2:9). The story of Sodom’s destruction found its place also in the NT (Mt 10:15; Lk 10:12; 17:29; Rom 9:29; 2 Pt 2:6; Jude 1:7; Rv 11:8).<\/p>\n\n<p>The primary story of Sodom and Gomorrah occurs in Genesis 18 and 19, although the biblical interest in the city begins in chapter 13 with the decision of Lot, Abraham’s nephew, to settle in the Jordan Valley, in the vicinity of Sodom, among people who were notorious sinners. It becomes clear that one of Sodom’s most grievous sins was sexual perversion, especially homosexuality. Lot’s offer of his virgin daughters to the men of Sodom to turn their attention away from his heavenly visitors is an indication of the demoralizing influence of the city.<\/p>\n<p>Four rulers from the East descended on the region of Sodom and Gomorrah sometime after Lot settled there and subdued the area. They returned 14 years later to quell a rebellion (Gn 14:1-5). Among their captives was Lot, who was (subsequently) rescued by Abraham. The evil of Sodom and Gomorrah was so great that the Lord determined to destroy them. Abraham pleaded for mercy for them if ten righteous men could be found (18:20-33). The two heavenly visitors who went from Abraham to Sodom found Lot sitting in the gate of Sodom (19:1), revealed God’s intentions to him, and persuaded Lot and his wife and two daughters to flee the city. Then the Lord rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah. The next morning Abraham saw the smoke from the destroyed cities rising like the smoke of a furnace.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of the Plain.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SODOM AND GOMORRAH Two of the “cities of the plain [valley]” referred to in Genesis 13:12. There were five cities—Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Bela or Zoar (Gn 14:2)—all situated in the valley of Siddim (i.e., the Salt Sea). Of these, Sodom is mentioned most frequently in Genesis—36 times in all, of which 16 references are to Sodom alone. Sodom became known in biblical literature as the supreme example of a wicked city, and its destruction (19:24) was used as a warning of God’s judgme...","summary_en":"SODOM AND GOMORRAH Two of the “cities of the plain [valley]” referred to in Genesis 13:12. There were five cities—Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Bela or Zoar (Gn 14:2)—all situated in the valley of Siddim (i.e., the Salt Sea). Of these, Sodom is mentioned most frequently in Genesis—36 times in all, of which 16 references are to Sodom alone. Sodom became known in biblical literature as the supreme example of a wicked city, and its destruction (19:24) was used as a warning of God’s judgme...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55880,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:12","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> God destroyed <em>Sodom<\/em> and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> God destroyed <em>Sodom<\/em> and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:12 God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).","summary_en":"10:12 God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83506,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:12","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> God destroyed <em>Sodom<\/em> and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> God destroyed <em>Sodom<\/em> and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:12 God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).","summary_en":"10:12 God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111132,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:12","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> God destroyed <em>Sodom<\/em> and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> God destroyed <em>Sodom<\/em> and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:12 God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).","summary_en":"10:12 God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138758,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:12","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> God destroyed <em>Sodom<\/em> and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> God destroyed <em>Sodom<\/em> and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:12 God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).","summary_en":"10:12 God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their wickedness (Gen 18:16–19:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":2974,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ashes","title_en":"Ashes","content_ro":"<h3>ASHES<\/h3>\n<p>Fine powder left after something has been thoroughly burned. The burning of sacrificial offerings on the tabernacle or temple altar produced ashes that were disposed of ceremonially (Lv 1:16; 4:12; 6:10-11; cf. Heb 9:13). The ashes on pagan altars figured in several OT accounts (1 Kgs 13:1-5; 2 Kgs 23:4). Ashes thrown into the air by Moses during the contest of God with the Egyptian pharaoh spread like fine dust over all the land of Egypt and caused a plague of boils to break out among both people and animals (Ex 9:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ashes are frequently mentioned in the Bible in connection with the ancient custom of putting ashes on oneself as a symbol of extreme grief, penitence, humiliation, or sense of worthlessness. The Bible refers to ashes and dust almost interchangeably in this usage. Examples of such expressions of emotion include Tamar’s distress after being sexually assaulted by her half brother (2 Sm 13:19), Mordecai’s agony over the Persian king’s order of genocide for the Jews of his realm (Est 4:1-3), Daniel’s confession and pleading for his captive people (Dn 9:3), and the king of Nineveh’s repentance after hearing Jonah’s preaching (Jon 3:6; cf. Lk 10:13). Ashes were spoken of as symbols of humility (Gn 18:27), worthlessness or futility (Jb 13:12; 30:19; Is 44:20), and destruction (Ez 28:18; 2 Pt 2:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Mourning.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ASHES<\/h3>\n<p>Fine powder left after something has been thoroughly burned. The burning of sacrificial offerings on the tabernacle or temple altar produced ashes that were disposed of ceremonially (Lv 1:16; 4:12; 6:10-11; cf. Heb 9:13). The ashes on pagan altars figured in several OT accounts (1 Kgs 13:1-5; 2 Kgs 23:4). Ashes thrown into the air by Moses during the contest of God with the Egyptian pharaoh spread like fine dust over all the land of Egypt and caused a plague of boils to break out among both people and animals (Ex 9:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ashes are frequently mentioned in the Bible in connection with the ancient custom of putting ashes on oneself as a symbol of extreme grief, penitence, humiliation, or sense of worthlessness. The Bible refers to ashes and dust almost interchangeably in this usage. Examples of such expressions of emotion include Tamar’s distress after being sexually assaulted by her half brother (2 Sm 13:19), Mordecai’s agony over the Persian king’s order of genocide for the Jews of his realm (Est 4:1-3), Daniel’s confession and pleading for his captive people (Dn 9:3), and the king of Nineveh’s repentance after hearing Jonah’s preaching (Jon 3:6; cf. Lk 10:13). Ashes were spoken of as symbols of humility (Gn 18:27), worthlessness or futility (Jb 13:12; 30:19; Is 44:20), and destruction (Ez 28:18; 2 Pt 2:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Mourning.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ASHES Fine powder left after something has been thoroughly burned. The burning of sacrificial offerings on the tabernacle or temple altar produced ashes that were disposed of ceremonially (Lv 1:16; 4:12; 6:10-11; cf. Heb 9:13). The ashes on pagan altars figured in several OT accounts (1 Kgs 13:1-5; 2 Kgs 23:4). Ashes thrown into the air by Moses during the contest of God with the Egyptian pharaoh spread like fine dust over all the land of Egypt and caused a plague of boils to break out among ...","summary_en":"ASHES Fine powder left after something has been thoroughly burned. The burning of sacrificial offerings on the tabernacle or temple altar produced ashes that were disposed of ceremonially (Lv 1:16; 4:12; 6:10-11; cf. Heb 9:13). The ashes on pagan altars figured in several OT accounts (1 Kgs 13:1-5; 2 Kgs 23:4). Ashes thrown into the air by Moses during the contest of God with the Egyptian pharaoh spread like fine dust over all the land of Egypt and caused a plague of boils to break out among ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4551,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bethsaida","title_en":"Bethsaida","content_ro":"<h3>BETHSAIDA<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17).<\/li>\n<p>Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sources, chiefly the writings of Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian. Two Bethsaidas, one on each side of the Sea of Galilee, were once postulated because the reference in Mark mentions the feeding of the 5,000 as happening across the lake from Bethsaida, whereas in Luke it seems to have taken place near Bethsaida. One solution is that the miracle occurred in the district surrounding Bethsaida, but that the quickest way to reach the city itself was to cross part of the lake. Such an interpretation questions the traditional location of the miracle (et-Tabgha on the west shore, nearer to Capernaum) but is preferable to the proposal of two Bethsaidas so close to each other.<\/p>\n<p>Bethsaida was merely a fishing village until it was enlarged and beautified by Philip the tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34), son of Herod the Great, after the death of Caesar Augustus. Philip was later buried there, according to Josephus. Bethsaida’s name was changed to Julias in honor of Julia, daughter of Augustus. That city was defended by Josephus when he was its military commander during the first Jewish revolt against Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus wrote that Bethsaida was “at the lake of Gennesareth” but “near to the Jordan River.” He also said that it was in lower Gaulanitis, a district that touched the northeast quarter of the Sea of Galilee. There is, however, no ancient “tell” or ruin fitting the size or description of the city near either the lake or the river. A suggestion that the small harbor of el-’Araj is the site of Bethsaida has little archaeological support, but et-Tell, located about two miles (3.2 kilometers) from the lake, shows evidence of extensive Roman occupation and building activity. At present, et-Tell seems to be the most satisfactory candidate for identification of Bethsaida.<\/p>\n<li>2. A variant name for the pool at Jerusalem, otherwise called Bethesda or Beth-zatha. <em>See<\/em> Bethesda; Beth-zatha.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>BETHSAIDA<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17).<\/li>\n<p>Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sources, chiefly the writings of Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian. Two Bethsaidas, one on each side of the Sea of Galilee, were once postulated because the reference in Mark mentions the feeding of the 5,000 as happening across the lake from Bethsaida, whereas in Luke it seems to have taken place near Bethsaida. One solution is that the miracle occurred in the district surrounding Bethsaida, but that the quickest way to reach the city itself was to cross part of the lake. Such an interpretation questions the traditional location of the miracle (et-Tabgha on the west shore, nearer to Capernaum) but is preferable to the proposal of two Bethsaidas so close to each other.<\/p>\n<p>Bethsaida was merely a fishing village until it was enlarged and beautified by Philip the tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34), son of Herod the Great, after the death of Caesar Augustus. Philip was later buried there, according to Josephus. Bethsaida’s name was changed to Julias in honor of Julia, daughter of Augustus. That city was defended by Josephus when he was its military commander during the first Jewish revolt against Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus wrote that Bethsaida was “at the lake of Gennesareth” but “near to the Jordan River.” He also said that it was in lower Gaulanitis, a district that touched the northeast quarter of the Sea of Galilee. There is, however, no ancient “tell” or ruin fitting the size or description of the city near either the lake or the river. A suggestion that the small harbor of el-’Araj is the site of Bethsaida has little archaeological support, but et-Tell, located about two miles (3.2 kilometers) from the lake, shows evidence of extensive Roman occupation and building activity. At present, et-Tell seems to be the most satisfactory candidate for identification of Bethsaida.<\/p>\n<li>2. A variant name for the pool at Jerusalem, otherwise called Bethesda or Beth-zatha. <em>See<\/em> Bethesda; Beth-zatha.<\/li>","summary_ro":"BETHSAIDA 1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17). Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sou...","summary_en":"BETHSAIDA 1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17). Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sou...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22341,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Korazin","title_en":"Korazin","content_ro":"<h3>KORAZIN<\/h3>\n<p>Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20).<\/p>\n<p>From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. <span>AD<\/span> 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars generally agree that the ruins of Khirbet Kerazeh on the basalt hills north of Capernaum are those of Korazin. The ruins indicate that it was a fairly important city. Remains of a synagogue, probably from the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, include a carved seat with an inscription, an example of a “Moses’ seat” (Mt 23:2). According to the Jewish Talmud, Korazin was known for its wheat.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KORAZIN<\/h3>\n<p>Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20).<\/p>\n<p>From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. <span>AD<\/span> 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars generally agree that the ruins of Khirbet Kerazeh on the basalt hills north of Capernaum are those of Korazin. The ruins indicate that it was a fairly important city. Remains of a synagogue, probably from the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, include a carved seat with an inscription, an example of a “Moses’ seat” (Mt 23:2). According to the Jewish Talmud, Korazin was known for its wheat.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KORAZIN Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20). From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. AD 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars g...","summary_en":"KORAZIN Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20). From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. AD 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars g...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22918,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lebanon","title_en":"Lebanon","content_ro":"<h3>LEBANON<\/h3>\n<p>Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">l-b-n<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the snow that lay on the mountains for six months of the year (Jer 18:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>At the southern end the Lebanon ranges are a direct continuation of the hills of northern Galilee, with Mt Hermon (Sirion, Senir) very prominent in the Anti-Lebanon range, rising to 9,230 feet (2,813.3 meters). The two ranges are divided by a broad valley, the valley of Lebanon (Jos 11:17) or “the entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:8), the modern Beqa’a.<\/p>\n<p>In the south the Lebanon range is separated from the Galilee hills by a deep east-west gorge through which the Litani River flows, entering the Mediterranean just north of Tyre. In its upper courses it follows the Beqa’a Valley in a northeasterly direction almost to Baalbek. The Lebanon ridge, about 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) long, stretches north to the east-west valley of the Nahr el-Kebir and is marked by a series of peaks. In the south are Gebel Rihan, Tomat, and Gebel Niha (ranging from 5,350 feet to nearly 6,230 feet, or 1,636.7 to 1,898.9 meters, high) east of Sidon. In the center lie Gebel Baruk, Gebel Kuneiyiseh, and Gebel Sunnin (7,220 feet, 6,890 feet, and 8,530 feet high, or 2,200.7 meters, 2,100.1 meters, and 2,599.9 meters high, respectively) east of Beirut. Further north, to the east of Tripoli, lies Qurnet es-Sauda, which reaches 9,840 feet (2,999.2 meters), and Qurnet Aruba, about 7,320 feet (2,231.1 meters) high.<\/p>\n<p>These high mountains trap the rain coming from the Mediterranean, providing both the mountain areas and the coastal strip below with good rainfall; beyond the mountains, the rainfall drops. It is along the coastal strip between the mountains and the sea that the Phoenicians flourished and towns like Tyre, Zarephath, Sidon, Berytus (Beirut), Byblos (Gebal), and Tripoli were established. The coastal area has a number of headlands that are extensions of the mountain range. The coastal road had to be cut around or through these spurs. A good example is the headland of Nahr el-Kelb, a little to the north of Beirut.<\/p>\n<p>On the east side of the Lebanon range is the Beqa’a Valley. The Orontes River rises in the north of this valley and flows north to enter the Mediterranean north of ancient Ugarit. This whole valley region was known in classical literature as Coele-syria (Hollow Syria). It was the “breadbasket” of the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>To the east of the Beqa’a Valley is the Anti-Lebanon range, in which the Barada River rises and flows east toward the fertile oasis of Damascus. Mt Hermon, in the southern part of the range, was known as Sirion by the Phoenicians and Senir by the Amorites (Dt 3:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Resources\">Resources<\/p>\n<p>Lebanon was famous in antiquity for its rich forests of fir and cedar. The coastal areas, the Beqa’a Valley, and the lower slopes of the mountains were suitable for olive trees, fruit trees, and vineyards, as well as some grain crops. One important product came from the sea: a mollusk of the gastropoda class from which a red or purple dye was obtained. The name “Phoenician” derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phoinos<\/span><em>,<\/em> red-purple. Wool dyed purple was available in Ugarit about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The Phoenicians had a monopoly on this industry for centuries. The people of Israel, who used a great deal of purple dye in their tabernacle furnishings (Ex 26) and the garments of their priests (Ex 28:4-6; 39:1, 28-29), probably obtained the dye from the Phoenicians.<\/p>\n<p>King Solomon had significant trading relations with Phoenicia. To build the temple in Jerusalem, cedar and fir were obtained from Hiram I of Tyre (1 Kgs 5:6, 9, 14; 7:2; 10:17, 21; 2 Chr 2:8, 16). Solomon paid for this timber in wheat and olive oil (1 Kgs 5:11). The trees were floated down by sea to a point in Solomon’s domain and transported from there to Jerusalem. Cedar and fir trees from Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon provided ships for Tyre (Ez 27:5), sacred barges and furniture for Egypt, and timber for building the second temple in Jerusalem (Ezr 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>From the ports of Lebanon, the Phoenicians traded with many lands. They mastered the art of shipbuilding, and their ships were used in peace and in war. A vivid picture of the trading activities of traders from Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, and Arvad is given in Ezekiel 27, where the extent and nature of their trade is given in considerable detail.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The area became of interest to the Egyptians during the fourth dynasty (c. 2600 <span>BC<\/span>) when Pharaoh Snofru acquired 40 shiploads of cedar from Lebanon. Byblos fell under Egyptian influence during the 12th dynasty (c. 1980–1800 <span>BC<\/span>) and Egyptians gave golden ornaments in exchange for cedar. During the 18th dynasty (c. 1552–1306 <span>BC<\/span>), Egypt conquered Syria, and the records speak regularly of cedar being taken as tribute. Later an envoy of Ramses XI named Wenamon paid dearly for the cedar (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>When Egyptian power waned, the Assyrians controlled the area and took vast quantities of cedar as tribute from the days of Tiglath-pileser I (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>) onward. Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian nation likewise controlled Lebanon and took away large quantities of cedar to build temples and palaces. The spoiling of Lebanon’s forests was spoken of by Isaiah (Is 14:8) and Habakkuk (Hb 2:17). In later centuries Lebanon passed successively under the domination of Persians, Greeks, and Romans.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the towns of Tyre and Sidon are generally coupled together (Mt 15:21; Mk 3:8; 7:24, 31; Lk 6:17; 10:13-14; Acts 12:20), though sometimes they are referred to alone (Acts 21:3, 7). A Greek woman who was a Syro-Phoenician is referred to in Mark 7:26. Jesus preached in these areas during his ministry. In biblical poetry the tall cedars of Lebanon were a symbol of majesty and strength (Jgs 9:15; 2 Kgs 14:9; Pss 92:12; 104:16; Is 35:2; 60:13). They were also a symbol of earthly pride that would be broken before the wrath of God one day (Ps 29:5; Is 2:13; 10:34; Jer 22:6; Ez 31:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEBANON<\/h3>\n<p>Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">l-b-n<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the snow that lay on the mountains for six months of the year (Jer 18:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>At the southern end the Lebanon ranges are a direct continuation of the hills of northern Galilee, with Mt Hermon (Sirion, Senir) very prominent in the Anti-Lebanon range, rising to 9,230 feet (2,813.3 meters). The two ranges are divided by a broad valley, the valley of Lebanon (Jos 11:17) or “the entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:8), the modern Beqa’a.<\/p>\n<p>In the south the Lebanon range is separated from the Galilee hills by a deep east-west gorge through which the Litani River flows, entering the Mediterranean just north of Tyre. In its upper courses it follows the Beqa’a Valley in a northeasterly direction almost to Baalbek. The Lebanon ridge, about 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) long, stretches north to the east-west valley of the Nahr el-Kebir and is marked by a series of peaks. In the south are Gebel Rihan, Tomat, and Gebel Niha (ranging from 5,350 feet to nearly 6,230 feet, or 1,636.7 to 1,898.9 meters, high) east of Sidon. In the center lie Gebel Baruk, Gebel Kuneiyiseh, and Gebel Sunnin (7,220 feet, 6,890 feet, and 8,530 feet high, or 2,200.7 meters, 2,100.1 meters, and 2,599.9 meters high, respectively) east of Beirut. Further north, to the east of Tripoli, lies Qurnet es-Sauda, which reaches 9,840 feet (2,999.2 meters), and Qurnet Aruba, about 7,320 feet (2,231.1 meters) high.<\/p>\n<p>These high mountains trap the rain coming from the Mediterranean, providing both the mountain areas and the coastal strip below with good rainfall; beyond the mountains, the rainfall drops. It is along the coastal strip between the mountains and the sea that the Phoenicians flourished and towns like Tyre, Zarephath, Sidon, Berytus (Beirut), Byblos (Gebal), and Tripoli were established. The coastal area has a number of headlands that are extensions of the mountain range. The coastal road had to be cut around or through these spurs. A good example is the headland of Nahr el-Kelb, a little to the north of Beirut.<\/p>\n<p>On the east side of the Lebanon range is the Beqa’a Valley. The Orontes River rises in the north of this valley and flows north to enter the Mediterranean north of ancient Ugarit. This whole valley region was known in classical literature as Coele-syria (Hollow Syria). It was the “breadbasket” of the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>To the east of the Beqa’a Valley is the Anti-Lebanon range, in which the Barada River rises and flows east toward the fertile oasis of Damascus. Mt Hermon, in the southern part of the range, was known as Sirion by the Phoenicians and Senir by the Amorites (Dt 3:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Resources\">Resources<\/p>\n<p>Lebanon was famous in antiquity for its rich forests of fir and cedar. The coastal areas, the Beqa’a Valley, and the lower slopes of the mountains were suitable for olive trees, fruit trees, and vineyards, as well as some grain crops. One important product came from the sea: a mollusk of the gastropoda class from which a red or purple dye was obtained. The name “Phoenician” derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phoinos<\/span><em>,<\/em> red-purple. Wool dyed purple was available in Ugarit about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The Phoenicians had a monopoly on this industry for centuries. The people of Israel, who used a great deal of purple dye in their tabernacle furnishings (Ex 26) and the garments of their priests (Ex 28:4-6; 39:1, 28-29), probably obtained the dye from the Phoenicians.<\/p>\n<p>King Solomon had significant trading relations with Phoenicia. To build the temple in Jerusalem, cedar and fir were obtained from Hiram I of Tyre (1 Kgs 5:6, 9, 14; 7:2; 10:17, 21; 2 Chr 2:8, 16). Solomon paid for this timber in wheat and olive oil (1 Kgs 5:11). The trees were floated down by sea to a point in Solomon’s domain and transported from there to Jerusalem. Cedar and fir trees from Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon provided ships for Tyre (Ez 27:5), sacred barges and furniture for Egypt, and timber for building the second temple in Jerusalem (Ezr 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>From the ports of Lebanon, the Phoenicians traded with many lands. They mastered the art of shipbuilding, and their ships were used in peace and in war. A vivid picture of the trading activities of traders from Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, and Arvad is given in Ezekiel 27, where the extent and nature of their trade is given in considerable detail.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The area became of interest to the Egyptians during the fourth dynasty (c. 2600 <span>BC<\/span>) when Pharaoh Snofru acquired 40 shiploads of cedar from Lebanon. Byblos fell under Egyptian influence during the 12th dynasty (c. 1980–1800 <span>BC<\/span>) and Egyptians gave golden ornaments in exchange for cedar. During the 18th dynasty (c. 1552–1306 <span>BC<\/span>), Egypt conquered Syria, and the records speak regularly of cedar being taken as tribute. Later an envoy of Ramses XI named Wenamon paid dearly for the cedar (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>When Egyptian power waned, the Assyrians controlled the area and took vast quantities of cedar as tribute from the days of Tiglath-pileser I (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>) onward. Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian nation likewise controlled Lebanon and took away large quantities of cedar to build temples and palaces. The spoiling of Lebanon’s forests was spoken of by Isaiah (Is 14:8) and Habakkuk (Hb 2:17). In later centuries Lebanon passed successively under the domination of Persians, Greeks, and Romans.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the towns of Tyre and Sidon are generally coupled together (Mt 15:21; Mk 3:8; 7:24, 31; Lk 6:17; 10:13-14; Acts 12:20), though sometimes they are referred to alone (Acts 21:3, 7). A Greek woman who was a Syro-Phoenician is referred to in Mark 7:26. Jesus preached in these areas during his ministry. In biblical poetry the tall cedars of Lebanon were a symbol of majesty and strength (Jgs 9:15; 2 Kgs 14:9; Pss 92:12; 104:16; Is 35:2; 60:13). They were also a symbol of earthly pride that would be broken before the wrath of God one day (Ps 29:5; Is 2:13; 10:34; Jer 22:6; Ez 31:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEBANON Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root l-b-n, meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the...","summary_en":"LEBANON Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root l-b-n, meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26010,"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":37809,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tyre","title_en":"Tyre","content_ro":"<h3>TYRE<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 <span>BC<\/span>. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyptian citation from the same period. Tyre first appears in the Bible in the list of cities that comprised Asher’s inheritance (Jos 19:29). At that time, it was described as a “strong city” and was evidently never conquered by the Israelites (2 Sm 24:7). Tyre was most significant as a mercantile center, with maritime contacts throughout the Mediterranean region and overland traffic with Mesopotamia and Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>During David’s and Solomon’s monarchies, Tyre was a strong commercial ally of Israel. Both David and Solomon contracted with Hiram of Tyre for timber, building materials, and skilled laborers, for which they provided Tyre with agriculture produce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 5:1-11; 1 Chr 14:1; 2 Chr 2:3-16). After the division of the kingdom, Tyre evidently maintained friendly relations with Israel for some time. Ahab’s wife, Jezebel, was the daughter of “Ethbaal, king of the Sidonians,” a king who is known elsewhere as Ithobal of Tyre (1 Kgs 16:31; cf. Menander). At some point, however, the pressure of Assyrian and Babylonian aggression dissolved the alliance, so that by the time of Samaria’s fall, Tyre and Israel were no longer aligned and shortly thereafter became enemies.<\/p>\n<p>During the later kingdom period, Tyre was the focus for some of the strongest prophetic denunciations recorded in Scripture (Is 23:1-18; Jer 25:22; 27:1-11; Ez 26:1-19; Jl 3:4-8; Am 1:9-10). Tyre’s condemnation was justified for several reasons. Because of its commercial significance, Tyre was the focal point of Assyrian and Egyptian rivalries. Tyre managed, however, to play these rivals against each other while building its wealth and exploiting its neighbors. Additionally, the city of Tyre was not only a city of unscrupulous merchants but also a center of religious idolatry and sexual immorality. Foremost among Tyre’s sins was pride induced by its great wealth and strategic location. Ezekiel’s prophecy against Tyre offers a detailed picture of the city, its commercial empire, its sin, and its eventual demise (Ez 26:1-28; 29:18-20). The final destruction of Tyre did not come for almost 1,900 years (<span>AD<\/span> 1291), though it was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for 13 years (587–574 <span>BC<\/span>), and conquered by Alexander the Great in 332 <span>BC<\/span> after a seven-month siege, during which he built a causeway out to the island. Ezekiel’s description of Tyre’s arrogance can be compared to that of Satan’s, with Tyre’s words “I am a God, I sit in the seat of God” (<span>kjv<\/span>) being the expression that led to the fall of both Satan and Tyre (Ez 28:2).<\/p>\n<p>Despite Alexander’s destruction of the city, Tyre had regained prominence by the NT period, being equal to or greater than Jerusalem in terms of population and commercial power. Jesus visited the region surrounding Tyre during his early ministry, healing the Syrophoenician woman’s daughter (Mt 15:21-28; Mk 7:24-31). Jesus also compared the Galilean towns that had rejected him to Tyre and Sidon, suggesting that the Galileans would bear greater responsibility for their rejection because of the number of miracles he had performed among them (Lk 10:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TYRE<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 <span>BC<\/span>. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyptian citation from the same period. Tyre first appears in the Bible in the list of cities that comprised Asher’s inheritance (Jos 19:29). At that time, it was described as a “strong city” and was evidently never conquered by the Israelites (2 Sm 24:7). Tyre was most significant as a mercantile center, with maritime contacts throughout the Mediterranean region and overland traffic with Mesopotamia and Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>During David’s and Solomon’s monarchies, Tyre was a strong commercial ally of Israel. Both David and Solomon contracted with Hiram of Tyre for timber, building materials, and skilled laborers, for which they provided Tyre with agriculture produce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 5:1-11; 1 Chr 14:1; 2 Chr 2:3-16). After the division of the kingdom, Tyre evidently maintained friendly relations with Israel for some time. Ahab’s wife, Jezebel, was the daughter of “Ethbaal, king of the Sidonians,” a king who is known elsewhere as Ithobal of Tyre (1 Kgs 16:31; cf. Menander). At some point, however, the pressure of Assyrian and Babylonian aggression dissolved the alliance, so that by the time of Samaria’s fall, Tyre and Israel were no longer aligned and shortly thereafter became enemies.<\/p>\n<p>During the later kingdom period, Tyre was the focus for some of the strongest prophetic denunciations recorded in Scripture (Is 23:1-18; Jer 25:22; 27:1-11; Ez 26:1-19; Jl 3:4-8; Am 1:9-10). Tyre’s condemnation was justified for several reasons. Because of its commercial significance, Tyre was the focal point of Assyrian and Egyptian rivalries. Tyre managed, however, to play these rivals against each other while building its wealth and exploiting its neighbors. Additionally, the city of Tyre was not only a city of unscrupulous merchants but also a center of religious idolatry and sexual immorality. Foremost among Tyre’s sins was pride induced by its great wealth and strategic location. Ezekiel’s prophecy against Tyre offers a detailed picture of the city, its commercial empire, its sin, and its eventual demise (Ez 26:1-28; 29:18-20). The final destruction of Tyre did not come for almost 1,900 years (<span>AD<\/span> 1291), though it was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for 13 years (587–574 <span>BC<\/span>), and conquered by Alexander the Great in 332 <span>BC<\/span> after a seven-month siege, during which he built a causeway out to the island. Ezekiel’s description of Tyre’s arrogance can be compared to that of Satan’s, with Tyre’s words “I am a God, I sit in the seat of God” (<span>kjv<\/span>) being the expression that led to the fall of both Satan and Tyre (Ez 28:2).<\/p>\n<p>Despite Alexander’s destruction of the city, Tyre had regained prominence by the NT period, being equal to or greater than Jerusalem in terms of population and commercial power. Jesus visited the region surrounding Tyre during his early ministry, healing the Syrophoenician woman’s daughter (Mt 15:21-28; Mk 7:24-31). Jesus also compared the Galilean towns that had rejected him to Tyre and Sidon, suggesting that the Galileans would bear greater responsibility for their rejection because of the number of miracles he had performed among them (Lk 10:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TYRE Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 BC. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyp...","summary_en":"TYRE Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 BC. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyp...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38538,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Woe","title_en":"Woe","content_ro":"<h3>WOE<\/h3>\n<p>An exclamation denoting pain or displeasure. Less frequently, it occurs as a noun denoting a disaster or calamity. For example, in Revelation 9:12, following the release of the demonic locusts from the abyss and their scourge upon those who follow the Beast, John announces, “The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come” (<span>niv<\/span>). Again, in Revelation 11:14, immediately before the seventh trumpet is sounded John writes, “The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon” (<span>niv<\/span>). The woes that Revelation describes are equivalent to the plagues of the OT, although somewhat more intense in that they are demonic in origin.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word is onomatapoeic: <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouai<\/span> (cf. the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">oi<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hoi<\/span>). It is not necessarily a pronouncement of judgment in every case. At times it is an expression of regret or sorrow about the miserable situation that prompted the exclamation. In each case the context needs to be taken into consideration. In Matthew 11:21 (Lk 10:13) when Jesus says, “Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida!” he was reproaching the people of those cities for their unbelief. The same is true in Luke 17:2 where Jesus pronounces woe upon the one who causes another to sin: “It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck” (<span>niv<\/span>). In the Lucan Sermon on the Plain, the Beatitudes are followed by four woe statements. These statements are not so much threats as they are expressions of regret or compassion.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WOE<\/h3>\n<p>An exclamation denoting pain or displeasure. Less frequently, it occurs as a noun denoting a disaster or calamity. For example, in Revelation 9:12, following the release of the demonic locusts from the abyss and their scourge upon those who follow the Beast, John announces, “The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come” (<span>niv<\/span>). Again, in Revelation 11:14, immediately before the seventh trumpet is sounded John writes, “The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon” (<span>niv<\/span>). The woes that Revelation describes are equivalent to the plagues of the OT, although somewhat more intense in that they are demonic in origin.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word is onomatapoeic: <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouai<\/span> (cf. the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">oi<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hoi<\/span>). It is not necessarily a pronouncement of judgment in every case. At times it is an expression of regret or sorrow about the miserable situation that prompted the exclamation. In each case the context needs to be taken into consideration. In Matthew 11:21 (Lk 10:13) when Jesus says, “Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida!” he was reproaching the people of those cities for their unbelief. The same is true in Luke 17:2 where Jesus pronounces woe upon the one who causes another to sin: “It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck” (<span>niv<\/span>). In the Lucan Sermon on the Plain, the Beatitudes are followed by four woe statements. These statements are not so much threats as they are expressions of regret or compassion.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WOE An exclamation denoting pain or displeasure. Less frequently, it occurs as a noun denoting a disaster or calamity. For example, in Revelation 9:12, following the release of the demonic locusts from the abyss and their scourge upon those who follow the Beast, John announces, “The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come” (niv). Again, in Revelation 11:14, immediately before the seventh trumpet is sounded John writes, “The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon” (niv)....","summary_en":"WOE An exclamation denoting pain or displeasure. Less frequently, it occurs as a noun denoting a disaster or calamity. For example, in Revelation 9:12, following the release of the demonic locusts from the abyss and their scourge upon those who follow the Beast, John announces, “The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come” (niv). Again, in Revelation 11:14, immediately before the seventh trumpet is sounded John writes, “The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon” (niv)....","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55881,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:13","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> <em>Korazin and Bethsaida,<\/em> two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Tyre and Sidon<\/em> were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> <em>Korazin and Bethsaida,<\/em> two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Tyre and Sidon<\/em> were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:13 Korazin and Bethsaida, two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • Tyre and Sidon were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).","summary_en":"10:13 Korazin and Bethsaida, two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • Tyre and Sidon were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83507,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:13","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> <em>Korazin and Bethsaida,<\/em> two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Tyre and Sidon<\/em> were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> <em>Korazin and Bethsaida,<\/em> two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Tyre and Sidon<\/em> were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:13 Korazin and Bethsaida, two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • Tyre and Sidon were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).","summary_en":"10:13 Korazin and Bethsaida, two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • Tyre and Sidon were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111133,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:13","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> <em>Korazin and Bethsaida,<\/em> two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Tyre and Sidon<\/em> were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> <em>Korazin and Bethsaida,<\/em> two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Tyre and Sidon<\/em> were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:13 Korazin and Bethsaida, two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • Tyre and Sidon were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).","summary_en":"10:13 Korazin and Bethsaida, two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • Tyre and Sidon were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138759,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:13","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> <em>Korazin and Bethsaida,<\/em> two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Tyre and Sidon<\/em> were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> <em>Korazin and Bethsaida,<\/em> two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Tyre and Sidon<\/em> were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:13 Korazin and Bethsaida, two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • Tyre and Sidon were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).","summary_en":"10:13 Korazin and Bethsaida, two of the towns in which Jesus ministered, were located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. • Tyre and Sidon were Gentile cities in Phoenicia, on the Mediterranean coast north of Galilee. The prophets had pronounced messages of judgment against their wickedness (Isa 23; Ezek 28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":14964,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hades*","title_en":"Hades*","content_ro":"<h3>HADES*<\/h3>\n<p>Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s <em>Odyssey<\/em> 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike existence that happened to all who died, good and evil alike. Gradually they and the Romans came to see it as a place of reward and punishment, an elaborately organized and guarded realm where the good were rewarded in the Elysian Fields and the evil were punished (so described by the Roman poet Virgil, 70–19 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Hades” became important to the Jews as the typical term used by the translators of the Septuagint to render the Hebrew name “Sheol” into Greek. This was a very suitable translation for the Hebrew term, for both words can signify the physical grave or death (Gn 37:35; Prv 5:5; 7:27), and both originally referred to a dark underworld (Jb 10:21-22) where existence was at best shadowy (Jb 38:17; Is 14:9). Sheol is described as under the ocean (Jb 26:5-6; Jon 2:2-3) and as having bars and gates (Jb 17:16). All people go there whether they are good or evil (Ps 89:48). In the earlier literature there is no hope of release from Sheol\/hades. C. S. Lewis describes this concept well in <em>The Silver Chair:<\/em> “Many sink down, and few return to the sunlit lands.” Of course, all these descriptions are in poetic literature; how literally the Hebrews (or the Greeks, for that matter) took their descriptions of hades\/Sheol is hard to say. They may have simply used the older picture-language of Greek poetry to describe that for which prose words were inadequate.<\/p>\n<p>Jew and Greek alike came in contact with Persia—the Jews at the time the postexilic writers were composing their books (e.g., Malachi, Daniel, and some psalms), and the Greeks somewhat later (they fought the Persians 520–479 <span>BC<\/span> and conquered them 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>). Whether because of Persian influence on these groups or not, during this period, the idea of reward and punishment after death developed, and Sheol\/hades changed from a shadow land to a differentiated place of reward and punishment for both Greeks (and Romans) and Jews. Josephus records that the Pharisees believed in reward and punishment at death (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.3), and a similar idea appears in 1 Enoch 22. In these and many other cases in Jewish literature, hades stands for the one place of the dead, which has two or more compartments. In other Jewish literature, hades is the place of torment for the wicked, while the righteous enter paradise (Pss of Sol 14; Wisd of Sol 2:1; 3:1). Thus, by the beginning of the NT period, hades has three meanings: (1) death, (2) the place of all the dead, and (3) the place of the wicked dead only. Context determines which meaning an author intends in a given passage.<\/p>\n<p>All these meanings appear in the NT. In Matthew 11:23 and Luke 10:15, Jesus speaks of Capernaum’s descending to hades (<span>nlt<\/span> mg). Most likely he simply means that the city will “die” or be destroyed. “Hades” means “death” in this context, as “heaven” means “exaltation.” Revelation 6:8 also exemplifies this: Death comes on a horse, and hades (a symbol of death) comes close behind. This personification of hades probably comes from the OT, where hades\/Sheol is viewed as a monster that devours people (Prv 1:12; 27:20; 30:16; Is 5:14; 28:15, 18; Hb 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 16:18 is a more difficult use of hades. The church will be built upon a rock and the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Here the place of the dead (complete with gates and bars) is a symbol for death: Christians may in fact be killed, but death (the gates of hades) will no more hold them than it held Christ. He who burst out of hades will bring his people out as well. This is also the meaning of Acts 2:27 (quoting Ps 16:10): Christ did not stay dead; his life did not remain in hades; unlike David, he rose from the dead. It is uncertain in either of these cases whether hades is simply a symbol for death or whether it means that Christ and the Christian actually went to a place of the dead called hades; probably the former is intended. Whatever the case, since Christ did rise, he has conquered death and hades. He appears in Revelation 1:18 as the one holding the keys (the control) to both.<\/p>\n<p>Two NT passages refer to hades as the place where the dead exist: Revelation 20:13-14 and Luke 16:23. In Revelation 20 hades is emptied of all who are in it (either all dead or the wicked dead, depending on one’s eschatology)—the resurrection is complete. When the wicked are judged and cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), hades is also thrown in. Luke 16:23, however, clearly refers to hades as the place of the wicked dead. There the rich man is tormented in a flame, while the poor man, Lazarus, goes to paradise (Abraham’s bosom).<\/p>\n<p>Hades, then, means three things in the NT, as it did in Jewish literature: (1) Death and its power is the most frequent meaning, especially in metaphorical uses. (2) It also means the place of the dead in general, when a writer wants to lump all the dead together. (3) It means, finally, the place where the wicked dead are tormented before the final judgment. This is its narrowest meaning, occurring only once in the NT (Lk 16:23). The Bible does not dwell on this torment—Dante’s picture in <em>The Inferno<\/em> draws on later speculation and Greco-Roman conceptions of hades more than on the Bible.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Gehenna; Hell; Sheol.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HADES*<\/h3>\n<p>Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s <em>Odyssey<\/em> 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike existence that happened to all who died, good and evil alike. Gradually they and the Romans came to see it as a place of reward and punishment, an elaborately organized and guarded realm where the good were rewarded in the Elysian Fields and the evil were punished (so described by the Roman poet Virgil, 70–19 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Hades” became important to the Jews as the typical term used by the translators of the Septuagint to render the Hebrew name “Sheol” into Greek. This was a very suitable translation for the Hebrew term, for both words can signify the physical grave or death (Gn 37:35; Prv 5:5; 7:27), and both originally referred to a dark underworld (Jb 10:21-22) where existence was at best shadowy (Jb 38:17; Is 14:9). Sheol is described as under the ocean (Jb 26:5-6; Jon 2:2-3) and as having bars and gates (Jb 17:16). All people go there whether they are good or evil (Ps 89:48). In the earlier literature there is no hope of release from Sheol\/hades. C. S. Lewis describes this concept well in <em>The Silver Chair:<\/em> “Many sink down, and few return to the sunlit lands.” Of course, all these descriptions are in poetic literature; how literally the Hebrews (or the Greeks, for that matter) took their descriptions of hades\/Sheol is hard to say. They may have simply used the older picture-language of Greek poetry to describe that for which prose words were inadequate.<\/p>\n<p>Jew and Greek alike came in contact with Persia—the Jews at the time the postexilic writers were composing their books (e.g., Malachi, Daniel, and some psalms), and the Greeks somewhat later (they fought the Persians 520–479 <span>BC<\/span> and conquered them 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>). Whether because of Persian influence on these groups or not, during this period, the idea of reward and punishment after death developed, and Sheol\/hades changed from a shadow land to a differentiated place of reward and punishment for both Greeks (and Romans) and Jews. Josephus records that the Pharisees believed in reward and punishment at death (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.3), and a similar idea appears in 1 Enoch 22. In these and many other cases in Jewish literature, hades stands for the one place of the dead, which has two or more compartments. In other Jewish literature, hades is the place of torment for the wicked, while the righteous enter paradise (Pss of Sol 14; Wisd of Sol 2:1; 3:1). Thus, by the beginning of the NT period, hades has three meanings: (1) death, (2) the place of all the dead, and (3) the place of the wicked dead only. Context determines which meaning an author intends in a given passage.<\/p>\n<p>All these meanings appear in the NT. In Matthew 11:23 and Luke 10:15, Jesus speaks of Capernaum’s descending to hades (<span>nlt<\/span> mg). Most likely he simply means that the city will “die” or be destroyed. “Hades” means “death” in this context, as “heaven” means “exaltation.” Revelation 6:8 also exemplifies this: Death comes on a horse, and hades (a symbol of death) comes close behind. This personification of hades probably comes from the OT, where hades\/Sheol is viewed as a monster that devours people (Prv 1:12; 27:20; 30:16; Is 5:14; 28:15, 18; Hb 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 16:18 is a more difficult use of hades. The church will be built upon a rock and the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Here the place of the dead (complete with gates and bars) is a symbol for death: Christians may in fact be killed, but death (the gates of hades) will no more hold them than it held Christ. He who burst out of hades will bring his people out as well. This is also the meaning of Acts 2:27 (quoting Ps 16:10): Christ did not stay dead; his life did not remain in hades; unlike David, he rose from the dead. It is uncertain in either of these cases whether hades is simply a symbol for death or whether it means that Christ and the Christian actually went to a place of the dead called hades; probably the former is intended. Whatever the case, since Christ did rise, he has conquered death and hades. He appears in Revelation 1:18 as the one holding the keys (the control) to both.<\/p>\n<p>Two NT passages refer to hades as the place where the dead exist: Revelation 20:13-14 and Luke 16:23. In Revelation 20 hades is emptied of all who are in it (either all dead or the wicked dead, depending on one’s eschatology)—the resurrection is complete. When the wicked are judged and cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), hades is also thrown in. Luke 16:23, however, clearly refers to hades as the place of the wicked dead. There the rich man is tormented in a flame, while the poor man, Lazarus, goes to paradise (Abraham’s bosom).<\/p>\n<p>Hades, then, means three things in the NT, as it did in Jewish literature: (1) Death and its power is the most frequent meaning, especially in metaphorical uses. (2) It also means the place of the dead in general, when a writer wants to lump all the dead together. (3) It means, finally, the place where the wicked dead are tormented before the final judgment. This is its narrowest meaning, occurring only once in the NT (Lk 16:23). The Bible does not dwell on this torment—Dante’s picture in <em>The Inferno<\/em> draws on later speculation and Greco-Roman conceptions of hades more than on the Bible.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Gehenna; Hell; Sheol.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HADES* Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s Odyssey 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike e...","summary_en":"HADES* Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s Odyssey 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike e...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55882,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:15","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:15<\/strong> <em>Capernaum<\/em> was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • <em>to the place of the dead:<\/em> Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:15<\/strong> <em>Capernaum<\/em> was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • <em>to the place of the dead:<\/em> Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:15 Capernaum was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • to the place of the dead: Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.","summary_en":"10:15 Capernaum was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • to the place of the dead: Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83508,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:15","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:15<\/strong> <em>Capernaum<\/em> was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • <em>to the place of the dead:<\/em> Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:15<\/strong> <em>Capernaum<\/em> was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • <em>to the place of the dead:<\/em> Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:15 Capernaum was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • to the place of the dead: Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.","summary_en":"10:15 Capernaum was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • to the place of the dead: Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111134,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:15","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:15<\/strong> <em>Capernaum<\/em> was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • <em>to the place of the dead:<\/em> Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:15<\/strong> <em>Capernaum<\/em> was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • <em>to the place of the dead:<\/em> Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:15 Capernaum was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • to the place of the dead: Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.","summary_en":"10:15 Capernaum was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • to the place of the dead: Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138760,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:15","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:15<\/strong> <em>Capernaum<\/em> was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • <em>to the place of the dead:<\/em> Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:15<\/strong> <em>Capernaum<\/em> was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • <em>to the place of the dead:<\/em> Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:15 Capernaum was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • to the place of the dead: Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.","summary_en":"10:15 Capernaum was Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry; this town saw many of his miracles (see 4:31-41). • to the place of the dead: Though Capernaum was blessed by the Messiah’s presence, it would be judged for its pride and rejection of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":2379,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Apostleship Apostle","title_en":"Apostleship Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>APOSTLE, APOSTLESHIP<\/h3>\n<p>Official designation given to certain leading individuals in the NT churches. Apostleship is the more comprehensive term, denoting the functions of the one who serves in such a capacity. Questions concerning origin, function, and history of the NT apostolate are much debated; one cannot speak of anything like consensus of opinion uniting the various church traditions. Some light is shed on our understanding of the terms by an examination of the possible linguistic and conceptual backgrounds.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “apostle” is not used outside the NT in the same sense as it is in the NT. It is derived from the verb “to send” and is at home in the language of the sea meaning a particular “ship” or “group of ships,” a “marine expedition” or “the leader” of such. Its usage is almost always impersonal and thoroughly passive. There is no hint of personal initiative or authorization, merely the connotation of something being sent. Later papyri use the word to mean “bill” or “invoice” or even a “passport,” continuing to reflect the vocabulary of maritime affairs.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the word was used to designate those who had been sent by Jesus with the proclamation of the gospel. From among the wider group of those who followed him, Jesus selected 12 men (Mt 10:1-4; Mk 3:13-19; Lk 6:12-16) who maintained with him a particularly close relationship, receiving private instruction and witnessing his miracles and controversy with the Jewish authorities. On one occasion, Jesus sent these men out to preach the message of repentance, to cast out demons, and to heal the sick; that is, to minister in ways that were characteristic of his own work (Mt 10:1-15; Mk 6:7-13, 30; Lk 9:1-6). The same relationship is expressed in the saying “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me” (Lk 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 10:40). It is clear that the Twelve are not merely to pass Jesus’ teaching on but to represent his very person. After the resurrection, Jesus commissioned the Twelve (Mt 28; Lk 24; Jn 20–21) to proclaim God’s act in Christ on behalf of all men. Only those who had been with Jesus from the beginning of his ministry to his resurrection were qualified to be his apostolic witnesses (Acts 1:21-22). Paul qualified because he had seen the risen Christ (1 Cor 15:4-10).<\/p>\n<p>The Pauline writings demonstrate two characteristic usages of the word “apostle.” On occasion, it refers to persons authorized by local congregations and entrusted with the safe delivery of specific gifts for other members of the Christian community (2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:25). More important are those passages where “apostle” takes on a more technical sense through the qualifying phrase “of Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; 11:13; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:1; Col 1:1; 1 Thes 2:6). The “sent one” is the “sent one of Jesus Christ” (Rom 16:7; 1 Cor 9:1, 5; 12:28; Gal 1:17-19). In the statements where Paul claims his own right to this title, he argues along lines assuming the same basic apostolic concept that Jesus had. He consistently links this claim to a specific event in the past in which the risen Lord had appeared to him (1 Cor 9:1; Gal 1:12, 16). This appearance he ranked alongside those of the resurrection appearances (1 Cor 15:3-8). Paul understood his experience outside Damascus (cf. Acts 9:1-19a; 22:6-16; 26:12-18; Gal 1:17) as a lifelong commission to preach the now-resurrected One (1 Cor 1:17; 2:1-2) chiefly among the Gentiles (Acts 9:15; 22:15; 26:17, 23; Gal 1:15-16). It was through his preaching ministry that Christ continued to work, creating the new people of God (1 Cor 9:1-2; Gal 2:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>APOSTLE, APOSTLESHIP<\/h3>\n<p>Official designation given to certain leading individuals in the NT churches. Apostleship is the more comprehensive term, denoting the functions of the one who serves in such a capacity. Questions concerning origin, function, and history of the NT apostolate are much debated; one cannot speak of anything like consensus of opinion uniting the various church traditions. Some light is shed on our understanding of the terms by an examination of the possible linguistic and conceptual backgrounds.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “apostle” is not used outside the NT in the same sense as it is in the NT. It is derived from the verb “to send” and is at home in the language of the sea meaning a particular “ship” or “group of ships,” a “marine expedition” or “the leader” of such. Its usage is almost always impersonal and thoroughly passive. There is no hint of personal initiative or authorization, merely the connotation of something being sent. Later papyri use the word to mean “bill” or “invoice” or even a “passport,” continuing to reflect the vocabulary of maritime affairs.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the word was used to designate those who had been sent by Jesus with the proclamation of the gospel. From among the wider group of those who followed him, Jesus selected 12 men (Mt 10:1-4; Mk 3:13-19; Lk 6:12-16) who maintained with him a particularly close relationship, receiving private instruction and witnessing his miracles and controversy with the Jewish authorities. On one occasion, Jesus sent these men out to preach the message of repentance, to cast out demons, and to heal the sick; that is, to minister in ways that were characteristic of his own work (Mt 10:1-15; Mk 6:7-13, 30; Lk 9:1-6). The same relationship is expressed in the saying “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me” (Lk 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 10:40). It is clear that the Twelve are not merely to pass Jesus’ teaching on but to represent his very person. After the resurrection, Jesus commissioned the Twelve (Mt 28; Lk 24; Jn 20–21) to proclaim God’s act in Christ on behalf of all men. Only those who had been with Jesus from the beginning of his ministry to his resurrection were qualified to be his apostolic witnesses (Acts 1:21-22). Paul qualified because he had seen the risen Christ (1 Cor 15:4-10).<\/p>\n<p>The Pauline writings demonstrate two characteristic usages of the word “apostle.” On occasion, it refers to persons authorized by local congregations and entrusted with the safe delivery of specific gifts for other members of the Christian community (2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:25). More important are those passages where “apostle” takes on a more technical sense through the qualifying phrase “of Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; 11:13; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:1; Col 1:1; 1 Thes 2:6). The “sent one” is the “sent one of Jesus Christ” (Rom 16:7; 1 Cor 9:1, 5; 12:28; Gal 1:17-19). In the statements where Paul claims his own right to this title, he argues along lines assuming the same basic apostolic concept that Jesus had. He consistently links this claim to a specific event in the past in which the risen Lord had appeared to him (1 Cor 9:1; Gal 1:12, 16). This appearance he ranked alongside those of the resurrection appearances (1 Cor 15:3-8). Paul understood his experience outside Damascus (cf. Acts 9:1-19a; 22:6-16; 26:12-18; Gal 1:17) as a lifelong commission to preach the now-resurrected One (1 Cor 1:17; 2:1-2) chiefly among the Gentiles (Acts 9:15; 22:15; 26:17, 23; Gal 1:15-16). It was through his preaching ministry that Christ continued to work, creating the new people of God (1 Cor 9:1-2; Gal 2:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"APOSTLE, APOSTLESHIP Official designation given to certain leading individuals in the NT churches. Apostleship is the more comprehensive term, denoting the functions of the one who serves in such a capacity. Questions concerning origin, function, and history of the NT apostolate are much debated; one cannot speak of anything like consensus of opinion uniting the various church traditions. Some light is shed on our understanding of the terms by an examination of the possible linguistic and con...","summary_en":"APOSTLE, APOSTLESHIP Official designation given to certain leading individuals in the NT churches. Apostleship is the more comprehensive term, denoting the functions of the one who serves in such a capacity. Questions concerning origin, function, and history of the NT apostolate are much debated; one cannot speak of anything like consensus of opinion uniting the various church traditions. Some light is shed on our understanding of the terms by an examination of the possible linguistic and con...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":41853,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Satan","title_en":"Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","summary_en":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69479,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Satan","title_en":"Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","summary_en":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97105,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Satan","title_en":"Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","summary_en":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124731,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Satan","title_en":"Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","summary_en":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19517,"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":65075,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus and Satan","title_en":"Jesus and Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","summary_en":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65310,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92701,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus and Satan","title_en":"Jesus and Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","summary_en":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92936,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120327,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus and Satan","title_en":"Jesus and Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","summary_en":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120562,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147953,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus and Satan","title_en":"Jesus and Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","summary_en":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148188,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":21901,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23614,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lucifer*","title_en":"Lucifer*","content_ro":"<h3>LUCIFER*<\/h3>\n<p>Appellation from a Latin word meaning “light bearer.” The Latin term refers to the planet Venus appearing in the evening and the morning, which is the brightest object in the sky except for the sun and moon. Others have identified it with the crescent moon. It is also said by some to be the planet Jupiter. The Hebrew term, from which the Latin <em>lucifer<\/em> is derived, is found in Isaiah 14:12: “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!” (<span>niv<\/span>). The Hebrew word means the “shining one.” It has cognates in Akkadian, Ugaritic, and Arabic. The Septuagint, Targum, and the Vulgate translate it as “morning star,” quite fitting in view of the appositional “son of the dawn.”<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew expression was probably never meant to be a name, but it has come to be used thus because the verse in which it occurs is applied to Satan. This apparently was done first by two of the church fathers, Tertullian and Origen. However, the popularity of Lucifer as a name for Satan may be attributed to its use in John Milton’s <em>Paradise Lost.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The event recorded in Isaiah 14:12 may be an example of a story quite commonly known in the time of Isaiah. This old Canaanite story concerned the morning star, who had attempted to rise high above the clouds and establish himself on the mountain where the gods assembled, in the uttermost part of the north. He had desired to take the place of the highest god, becoming ruler of the world. His attempts were thwarted, and he was cast into the underworld. This story of the minor star deity aspiring to ascend above the throne of the most high god served, in the purposes of Isaiah, as an excellent analogy to the pride and aspirations of the king of Babylon, the person with whom chapters 13 and 14 are concerned. Isaiah states (14:3-4) that Yahweh, the God of Israel, would give the people relief from the tyranny of their oppressors, and they would take up a taunt song against the king. Although he had sought to be great, he would be brought low; he who sought to be a god would, with his descendants, cease to exist on the earth. Though the Hebrews had no myths, illustrations from familiar gentile mythology often were used to express spiritual truth.<\/p>\n<p>There are many who believe the expression (and surrounding context) refers to Satan. They believe the similarities among Isaiah 14:12, Luke 10:18, and Revelation 12:7-10 warrant this conclusion. However, although the NT passages do speak of Satan’s fall, the context of the Isaiah passage describes the defeated king of Babylon. The Babylonian king had desired to be above God and so fell from heaven. His doom is pictured as already accomplished. Though defeat is certain for Satan, he yet continues his evil acts against God’s people. Not until the final judgment (Rv 12–20) will his fate be sealed and his activity stopped. Isaiah, then, is not speaking of Satan in 14:12 but of the proud, and soon to be humiliated, king of Babylon.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Satan.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LUCIFER*<\/h3>\n<p>Appellation from a Latin word meaning “light bearer.” The Latin term refers to the planet Venus appearing in the evening and the morning, which is the brightest object in the sky except for the sun and moon. Others have identified it with the crescent moon. It is also said by some to be the planet Jupiter. The Hebrew term, from which the Latin <em>lucifer<\/em> is derived, is found in Isaiah 14:12: “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!” (<span>niv<\/span>). The Hebrew word means the “shining one.” It has cognates in Akkadian, Ugaritic, and Arabic. The Septuagint, Targum, and the Vulgate translate it as “morning star,” quite fitting in view of the appositional “son of the dawn.”<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew expression was probably never meant to be a name, but it has come to be used thus because the verse in which it occurs is applied to Satan. This apparently was done first by two of the church fathers, Tertullian and Origen. However, the popularity of Lucifer as a name for Satan may be attributed to its use in John Milton’s <em>Paradise Lost.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The event recorded in Isaiah 14:12 may be an example of a story quite commonly known in the time of Isaiah. This old Canaanite story concerned the morning star, who had attempted to rise high above the clouds and establish himself on the mountain where the gods assembled, in the uttermost part of the north. He had desired to take the place of the highest god, becoming ruler of the world. His attempts were thwarted, and he was cast into the underworld. This story of the minor star deity aspiring to ascend above the throne of the most high god served, in the purposes of Isaiah, as an excellent analogy to the pride and aspirations of the king of Babylon, the person with whom chapters 13 and 14 are concerned. Isaiah states (14:3-4) that Yahweh, the God of Israel, would give the people relief from the tyranny of their oppressors, and they would take up a taunt song against the king. Although he had sought to be great, he would be brought low; he who sought to be a god would, with his descendants, cease to exist on the earth. Though the Hebrews had no myths, illustrations from familiar gentile mythology often were used to express spiritual truth.<\/p>\n<p>There are many who believe the expression (and surrounding context) refers to Satan. They believe the similarities among Isaiah 14:12, Luke 10:18, and Revelation 12:7-10 warrant this conclusion. However, although the NT passages do speak of Satan’s fall, the context of the Isaiah passage describes the defeated king of Babylon. The Babylonian king had desired to be above God and so fell from heaven. His doom is pictured as already accomplished. Though defeat is certain for Satan, he yet continues his evil acts against God’s people. Not until the final judgment (Rv 12–20) will his fate be sealed and his activity stopped. Isaiah, then, is not speaking of Satan in 14:12 but of the proud, and soon to be humiliated, king of Babylon.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Satan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LUCIFER* Appellation from a Latin word meaning “light bearer.” The Latin term refers to the planet Venus appearing in the evening and the morning, which is the brightest object in the sky except for the sun and moon. Others have identified it with the crescent moon. It is also said by some to be the planet Jupiter. The Hebrew term, from which the Latin lucifer is derived, is found in Isaiah 14:12: “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to th...","summary_en":"LUCIFER* Appellation from a Latin word meaning “light bearer.” The Latin term refers to the planet Venus appearing in the evening and the morning, which is the brightest object in the sky except for the sun and moon. Others have identified it with the crescent moon. It is also said by some to be the planet Jupiter. The Hebrew term, from which the Latin lucifer is derived, is found in Isaiah 14:12: “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to th...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31592,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophecy","title_en":"Prophecy","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","summary_en":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33991,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Satan","title_en":"Satan","content_ro":"<h3>SATAN<\/h3>\n<p>Spirit being who opposes God and seeks to frustrate his plans and lead his people into rebellion.<\/p>\n<p>Satan is seldom mentioned in the OT. He is pictured as an angel who acts as the heavenly prosecutor (Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zec 3:1-2). As such, he is called “the satan” or “the accuser,” and there is nothing in the context to indicate that the angel is evil. It is not until the late OT period that Satan appears as a tempter: in 1 Chronicles 21:1, the story of 2 Samuel 24:1 is retold with Satan (used for the first time as a proper name) substituted for God and pictured as an evil figure. The OT, then, has no developed doctrine of Satan but contains the raw material from which the later doctrine came. (Some people see Lucifer of Is 14:12 as a reference to Satan, but the context is clearly referring to the king of Babylon; it is therefore unlikely that any reference to Satan was intended.)<\/p>\n<p>The Jews further developed the idea of Satan during the intertestamental period, also calling him Belial, Mastema, and Sammael. Three differing conceptions appear. First, the Satan of the OT reappears in the roles of tempting people, of accusing them in heaven before God, and of hindering God’s saving plan (Jubilees 11:5; 17:16; Assumption of Moses 17; 1 Enoch 40:7). Second, the Dead Sea Scrolls present Satan (Belial) as the leader of the evil forces and attacker of the righteous. This development was probably influenced by the evil god of Zoroastrian religion. But unlike the Zoroastrian idea, the scrolls never present two gods but rather one God who has created both Belial and the Prince of Light (who is sure to win in the end, for God is with him). Third, in this literature Satan is often identified with OT stories from which his name was originally absent: he lusted after Eve and therefore caused the fall (Wisd of Sol 2:24), he controls the angels who fell in Genesis 6:1-4 (Jubilees 10:5-8; 19:28), or he is a fallen angel himself (2 Enoch 29:4).<\/p>\n<p>The NT has a developed portrayal of Satan, and he comes with a whole list of names: Satan (Hebrew for “accuser”), devil (the Greek translation of Satan), Belial, Beelzebul, the Adversary, the Dragon, the Enemy, the Serpent, the Tester, and the Wicked One. Satan is pictured as the ruler of a host of angels (Mt 25:41) and the controller of the world (Lk 4:6; Acts 26:18; 2 Cor 4:4), who especially governs all who are not Christians (Mk 4:15; Jn 8:44; Acts 13:10; Col 1:13). He is opposed to God and seeks to alienate all people from God; therefore, he is an especially dangerous foe of Christians (Lk 8:33; 1 Cor 7:5; 1 Pt 5:8), who must steadfastly resist him and see through his cunning (2 Cor 2:11; Eph 6:11; Jas 4:7). Satan works his evil will by tempting persons (Jn 13:2; Acts 5:3), by hindering God’s workers (1 Thes 2:18), by accusing Christians before God (Rv 12:10), and by controlling the evil persons who resist the gospel (2 Thes 2:9; Rv 2:9, 13; 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>Most importantly, however, the NT teaches us that this being, who has been evil from the beginning (1 Jn 3:8), has now been bound and cast out of heaven through the ministry of Jesus (Lk 10:18; Rv 12). While Satan is still a dangerous enemy, Jesus himself prays for us and has given us the powerful weapons of prayer, faith, and the efficacy of his blood. Satan can still cause physical illness when allowed by God (2 Cor 12:7), and persons can be delivered over to him for punishment (1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tm 1:20). Satan will always be under God’s control, who will eventually destroy him (Rom 16:20; Rv 20:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Angel; Demon; Demon-possession; Lucifer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SATAN<\/h3>\n<p>Spirit being who opposes God and seeks to frustrate his plans and lead his people into rebellion.<\/p>\n<p>Satan is seldom mentioned in the OT. He is pictured as an angel who acts as the heavenly prosecutor (Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zec 3:1-2). As such, he is called “the satan” or “the accuser,” and there is nothing in the context to indicate that the angel is evil. It is not until the late OT period that Satan appears as a tempter: in 1 Chronicles 21:1, the story of 2 Samuel 24:1 is retold with Satan (used for the first time as a proper name) substituted for God and pictured as an evil figure. The OT, then, has no developed doctrine of Satan but contains the raw material from which the later doctrine came. (Some people see Lucifer of Is 14:12 as a reference to Satan, but the context is clearly referring to the king of Babylon; it is therefore unlikely that any reference to Satan was intended.)<\/p>\n<p>The Jews further developed the idea of Satan during the intertestamental period, also calling him Belial, Mastema, and Sammael. Three differing conceptions appear. First, the Satan of the OT reappears in the roles of tempting people, of accusing them in heaven before God, and of hindering God’s saving plan (Jubilees 11:5; 17:16; Assumption of Moses 17; 1 Enoch 40:7). Second, the Dead Sea Scrolls present Satan (Belial) as the leader of the evil forces and attacker of the righteous. This development was probably influenced by the evil god of Zoroastrian religion. But unlike the Zoroastrian idea, the scrolls never present two gods but rather one God who has created both Belial and the Prince of Light (who is sure to win in the end, for God is with him). Third, in this literature Satan is often identified with OT stories from which his name was originally absent: he lusted after Eve and therefore caused the fall (Wisd of Sol 2:24), he controls the angels who fell in Genesis 6:1-4 (Jubilees 10:5-8; 19:28), or he is a fallen angel himself (2 Enoch 29:4).<\/p>\n<p>The NT has a developed portrayal of Satan, and he comes with a whole list of names: Satan (Hebrew for “accuser”), devil (the Greek translation of Satan), Belial, Beelzebul, the Adversary, the Dragon, the Enemy, the Serpent, the Tester, and the Wicked One. Satan is pictured as the ruler of a host of angels (Mt 25:41) and the controller of the world (Lk 4:6; Acts 26:18; 2 Cor 4:4), who especially governs all who are not Christians (Mk 4:15; Jn 8:44; Acts 13:10; Col 1:13). He is opposed to God and seeks to alienate all people from God; therefore, he is an especially dangerous foe of Christians (Lk 8:33; 1 Cor 7:5; 1 Pt 5:8), who must steadfastly resist him and see through his cunning (2 Cor 2:11; Eph 6:11; Jas 4:7). Satan works his evil will by tempting persons (Jn 13:2; Acts 5:3), by hindering God’s workers (1 Thes 2:18), by accusing Christians before God (Rv 12:10), and by controlling the evil persons who resist the gospel (2 Thes 2:9; Rv 2:9, 13; 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>Most importantly, however, the NT teaches us that this being, who has been evil from the beginning (1 Jn 3:8), has now been bound and cast out of heaven through the ministry of Jesus (Lk 10:18; Rv 12). While Satan is still a dangerous enemy, Jesus himself prays for us and has given us the powerful weapons of prayer, faith, and the efficacy of his blood. Satan can still cause physical illness when allowed by God (2 Cor 12:7), and persons can be delivered over to him for punishment (1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tm 1:20). Satan will always be under God’s control, who will eventually destroy him (Rom 16:20; Rv 20:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Angel; Demon; Demon-possession; Lucifer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SATAN Spirit being who opposes God and seeks to frustrate his plans and lead his people into rebellion. Satan is seldom mentioned in the OT. He is pictured as an angel who acts as the heavenly prosecutor (Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zec 3:1-2). As such, he is called “the satan” or “the accuser,” and there is nothing in the context to indicate that the angel is evil. It is not until the late OT period that Satan appears as a tempter: in 1 Chronicles 21:1, the story of 2 Samuel 24:1 is retold with Satan ...","summary_en":"SATAN Spirit being who opposes God and seeks to frustrate his plans and lead his people into rebellion. Satan is seldom mentioned in the OT. He is pictured as an angel who acts as the heavenly prosecutor (Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zec 3:1-2). As such, he is called “the satan” or “the accuser,” and there is nothing in the context to indicate that the angel is evil. It is not until the late OT period that Satan appears as a tempter: in 1 Chronicles 21:1, the story of 2 Samuel 24:1 is retold with Satan ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55883,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:18","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:18<\/strong> <em>I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning!<\/em> See Rev 12:7-12.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:18<\/strong> <em>I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning!<\/em> See Rev 12:7-12.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:18 I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning! See Rev 12:7-12.","summary_en":"10:18 I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning! See Rev 12:7-12.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83509,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:18","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:18<\/strong> <em>I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning!<\/em> See Rev 12:7-12.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:18<\/strong> <em>I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning!<\/em> See Rev 12:7-12.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:18 I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning! See Rev 12:7-12.","summary_en":"10:18 I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning! See Rev 12:7-12.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111135,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:18","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:18<\/strong> <em>I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning!<\/em> See Rev 12:7-12.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:18<\/strong> <em>I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning!<\/em> See Rev 12:7-12.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:18 I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning! See Rev 12:7-12.","summary_en":"10:18 I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning! See Rev 12:7-12.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138761,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:18","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:18<\/strong> <em>I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning!<\/em> See Rev 12:7-12.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:18<\/strong> <em>I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning!<\/em> See Rev 12:7-12.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:18 I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning! See Rev 12:7-12.","summary_en":"10:18 I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning! See Rev 12:7-12.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65353,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92979,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120605,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148231,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":2057,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Animals","title_en":"Animals","content_ro":"<h3>ANIMALS<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals as object lessons.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical approach to classification of animals is somewhat different from the system of classification used by biologists today. The present system of classification, which traces back to Carolus Linnaeus (an 18th-century Swedish botanist), is based on structure, both internal and external. The biblical basis of classification is habitat. Thus Genesis 1 speaks of aquatic organisms (v 20); aerial organisms (v 21); animals that crawl on the ground (v 24); cattle or domesticated animals (animals that live in association with humans) (v 24); and wild animals (v 24). The same system of classification is followed in Leviticus 11 and throughout Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the divergence between systems of classification, the various animals of the Bible will be listed here in alphabetical order—including reptiles, fish, and even invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms, and sponges. Birds are discussed in a separate article.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Adder<\/p>\n<p>• Ant<\/p>\n<p>• Antelope<\/p>\n<p>• Ape<\/p>\n<p>• Asp<\/p>\n<p>• Ass<\/p>\n<p>• Badger<\/p>\n<p>• Bat<\/p>\n<p>• Bear<\/p>\n<p>• Bee<\/p>\n<p>• Behemoth<\/p>\n<p>• Camel<\/p>\n<p>• Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>• Cattle<\/p>\n<p>• Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>• Coral<\/p>\n<p>• Cricket<\/p>\n<p>• Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>• Deer<\/p>\n<p>• Dog<\/p>\n<p>• Donkey<\/p>\n<p>• Dragon<\/p>\n<p>• Fish<\/p>\n<p>• Flea<\/p>\n<p>• Fly<\/p>\n<p>• Fox<\/p>\n<p>• Frog<\/p>\n<p>• Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>• Gecko<\/p>\n<p>• Gnat<\/p>\n<p>• Goat<\/p>\n<p>• Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>• Hare<\/p>\n<p>• Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>• Horse<\/p>\n<p>• Hyena<\/p>\n<p>• Jackal<\/p>\n<p>• Leech<\/p>\n<p>• Leopard<\/p>\n<p>• Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>• Lion<\/p>\n<p>• Lizard<\/p>\n<p>• Locust<\/p>\n<p>• Mole<\/p>\n<p>• Moth<\/p>\n<p>• Mouse<\/p>\n<p>• Mule<\/p>\n<p>• Pig<\/p>\n<p>• Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>• Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>• Sheep<\/p>\n<p>• Snail<\/p>\n<p>• Snake<\/p>\n<p>• Spider<\/p>\n<p>• Sponge<\/p>\n<p>• Unicorn<\/p>\n<p>• Wasp<\/p>\n<p>• Whale<\/p>\n<p>• Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>• Wolf<\/p>\n<p>• Worm<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Adder\">Adder<\/p>\n<p>One of the 20 poisonous snakes found in Israel and surrounding countries, also referred to as cockatrice and viper. True vipers (genus <em>Cerastes, Echis colorata,<\/em> and <em>Vipera palestina<\/em>) also exist there, poisonous snakes with curved fangs that spring into position when the snake strikes. The horned viper <em>(Cerastes hasselquistii)<\/em> may attack horses. It is 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 centimeters) long and often lies in ambush in the sand with only its eyes and the hornlike protrusions on its head visible.<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and John the Baptist referred to the viper several times (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). The reference in Acts 28:3 is probably to a small viper <em>(Vipera aspis)<\/em> that strikes rapidly and is very pugnacious. It is found in southern Europe and hisses each time it inhales and exhales. The poison of vipers attacks the respiratory system and disintegrates red blood cells.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ant\">Ant<\/p>\n<p>Mentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in the book of Proverbs. For many years Solomon was charged with a biological error when he referred to the ant as providing her meat in the summer and gathering her food in the harvest (Prv 6:8). Critics of the Bible were quick to point out that, so far as was then known, ants do not store up food. They assumed that Solomon had probably kicked open an ant hill and mistaken the pupal cases (pods in which immature ants grow to maturity) for grain or had observed ants carrying bits of grain, leaves, and other matter to their nests.<\/p>\n<p>At least three species of grain-storing ants are now known—two occur in Israel and the other in Mediterranean countries. The particular species referred to by Solomon (Prv 6:6-8; 30:24-25) is probably the harvester ant <em>(Messor semirufus).<\/em> Its granaries are flat chambers connected by galleries irregularly scattered over an area about six feet (1.8 meters) in diameter and about a foot (.3 meter) deep in the ground. Seeds are collected from the ground or picked from plants. The head, or radicle, which is the softest part of the kernel, is bitten off to prevent germination, and the chaff and empty capsules are discarded on kitchen middens (refuse piles) outside the nest. Individual granaries may be 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) in diameter and a half inch (1.2 centimeters) high. Some nests are known to be 40 feet (12 meters) in diameter and 6 to 7 feet (approx. 2 meters) deep with several entrances.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Antelope\">Antelope<\/p>\n<p>Several antelope-like creatures are referred to in the Scriptures. One seems to be the white oryx <em>(Oryx leucoryx),<\/em> referred to in Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild ox”; <span>rsv<\/span> “antelope”) and Isaiah 51:20 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild bull”; <span>RSV <\/span>“antelope”). The oryx was probably the antelope, commonly used for food because its long horns made it relatively easy to catch.<\/p>\n<p>Another antelope mentioned in the Bible is the addax <em>(Addax nasomaculatus),<\/em> probably the “pygarg” of Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span>). It is a native of North Africa with grayish white hinder parts, a white patch on the forehead, and twisted and ringed horns. The word “pygarg” comes from a Greek word meaning “white rump.” The addax is about the size of a donkey. Its body is closely covered with short hair. It has a short mane on the underside of its neck that makes the head look somewhat like that of a goat. The hooves are broad and flat, and the tail resembles that of a donkey. It is common in Africa and in Arabia, where Arabs hunt it with falcons and dogs.<\/p>\n<p>Antelopes are very graceful and run with their heads held high. Both sexes have long, permanent, hollow horns. With the oryx the horns go straight back; addax horns are twisted and ringed. Antelope are alert, wary, and keen sighted. They are usually found in herds of from two to a dozen. If injured or brought to bay, an antelope attacks with its head lowered so that the sharp horns point forward. Antelopes feed on grasses and shrubs, drinking from streams and water holes. When water is scarce, they eat melons and succulent bulbs. Both addax and oryx were ceremonially clean in Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ape\">Ape<\/p>\n<p>Primate not native to Palestine. The two references to apes in the OT (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) refer to their importation by King Solomon with other treasures on board the ships of his mercantile fleet. There is some question concerning the origin of those primates. Some believe that the mention of “ivory” in the same verses suggests they came from East Africa and that they were indeed apes, that is, tailless primates. Others, believing they came from India or Ceylon, suggest that they were actually monkeys. There the baboon (genus Papeio), a large monkey, was considered sacred to the god Thoth. Males of that genus were kept in temples, and the more docile females were often kept as house pets. Such baboons frequently had some of their teeth removed or ground down to lessen the danger of their biting. A number of mummified baboons have been found in Egypt, indicating the high regard in which they were held.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Asp\">Asp<\/p>\n<p>Poisonous snake. Most biblical references to the asp (Dt 32:33) seem to be to the Egyptian cobra <em>(Naja haje),<\/em> which conceals itself in holes, walls, and rocks and has the ability to expand its neck by raising its anterior ribs so as to enlarge the front of its breast into the shape of a flat disc. Its potent poison can cause death in 30 minutes. It attains a length of about 80 inches (2 meters). The fangs are permanently erect, not movable as in the vipers (the common poisonous snakes of North America; only the coral snake in America has permanently erect fangs). Cobra poison attacks the nervous system, causing muscular paralysis. The Egyptians looked upon it as a sacred creature; they regarded it as a protector since it fed on the rodents that ate their crops. The “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:6; Dt 8:15, both <span>rsv<\/span>) may have been cobras; “fiery” probably refers to the burning fever caused by their venom. Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 (“flying serpent”) may refer to the hood of the cobra.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ass\">Ass<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Donkey (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Badger\">Badger<\/p>\n<p>Small hoofed mammal. What the <span>kjv<\/span> calls a “coney,” modern translations name “rock badger” (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7; Ps 104:18; Prv 30:26). The rock badger spoken of in the Bible is probably the Syrian rock hyrax <em>(Hyrax syriaca),<\/em> the only species of hyrax found outside Africa. This small ungulate (having hooflike toenails) lives among rocks from the Dead Sea valley to Mt Hermon. It is strictly a herbivorous (plant-eating) animal about the size of a rabbit. It resembles a guinea pig more than a rabbit, having quite inconspicuous ears and a very small tail. It has broad nails with four toes on its forelegs and three on its hind legs, the toes being connected with skin almost like a web. Pads acting as sucking discs under its feet enable it to keep its footing on slippery rocks. With its yellow and brown fur, it is sometimes called the bear rat because of its resemblance to a tailless rat. It is also equipped with black whiskers that may be seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>These rock badgers, or hyraxes, live together in colonies of from 6 to 50 animals, often sunning themselves on rocks. They are difficult to catch. Guards are posted, and if approaching danger is sighted, the whole group will scurry for cover, warned by the sharp whistles of the guards. Thus they are commended for taking refuge in the rocks (Ps 104:18) and are called wise for making “their houses in the rocks” (Prv 30:24, 26, <span>kjv<\/span>). The badger is not a ruminant (does not chew its cud), but the motion of its jaws may suggest that it chews its cud. That is probably why it was included with other cud-chewing animals in the Jewish food laws (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7). It was forbidden to the Jews as food because it did not have cloven hooves. Some Arabs eat and even prize its meat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bat\">Bat<\/p>\n<p>Flying mammals according to modern classification. They have hair and provide milk for their young. The Bible classifies them with other aerial creatures. Bats take shelter in caves, crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and also in exposed places on trees. In colder areas they hibernate or migrate. The normal resting position for a bat is hanging head downward. Bats “swim” through the air rather than fly because they move with their legs as well as with their wings.<\/p>\n<p>The bat’s thumb is free and terminates in a single hook claw used for climbing and hanging. The hind feet have five toes, all pointing the same way. The large chest accommodates the powerful muscles needed for flying. Because they orient themselves by echo location, the sense of hearing is very well developed.<\/p>\n<p>Most bats are insect eaters, seizing insects in flight. Many insectivorous bats also eat some fruit. Other bats feed exclusively, usually in groups, on fruit and green vegetation. Fruit-eating bats generally live in the tropics where fruit is constantly ripening, although some have been found in the Holy Land. These bats tend to be larger than the insectivores, having a wingspread of up to five feet (1.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>A third group includes flower-eating bats that feed on pollen and nectar. These small bats with long pointed heads and long tongues are found only in tropical and semitropical regions. Three species of vampire bats, which do not occur in the Holy Land, eat blood by making a small incision and lapping it up. Carnivorous (meat-eating) bats prey on birds, lizards, and frogs. Fish-eating bats catch fish at or near the water surface.<\/p>\n<p>Eight varieties of bats are known in the Holy Land. One of them, the little brown bat (genus <em>Myotis<\/em>), is worldwide in its distribution. It is insectivorous and probably has the widest distribution of any nonhuman terrestrial mammal. Brown bats are mostly cave dwellers. The females form maternity colonies that may number in the tens of thousands.<\/p>\n<p>Two species of mouse-tailed bats (genus <em>Rhinopoma<\/em>) are found in the Holy Land. Their tails are nearly as long as the head and body combined. They are colonial, roosting in caves, rock clefts, wells, pyramids, palaces, and houses. Like the brown bat, they are insectivorous. The slit-faced or hollow-faced bats (genus <em>Nycteris<\/em>) are also found in the Holy Land. They are insectivorous and roost in groups from 6 to 20.<\/p>\n<p>The bats found in the Holy Land vary in size from that of a mouse to the size of a rat; the largest species measures more than 20 inches (51 centimeters) across the wings. The bat was unclean to the Jews (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bear\">Bear<\/p>\n<p>Large, heavy, big-headed mammal with short, powerful limbs, a short tail, and small eyes and ears. Bears have a “plantigrade” walk: they walk on both the sole and heel as humans do. The Palestinian bear is a Syrian version of the brown bear <em>(Ursus arctos syriacus).<\/em> It can grow to a height of 6 feet (1.8 meters) and may weigh as much as 500 pounds (227 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>Bears have an excellent sense of smell but less developed senses of sight and hearing. They are omnivorous (eating any kind of food); they subsist largely on vegetation, fruits, insects, and fish.<\/p>\n<p>Bears are usually peaceful and inoffensive, but if they think they must defend themselves (Lam 3:10) or their young (2 Sm 17:8; Prv 17:12; Hos 13:8), they may be formidable and dangerous adversaries. David boasted of his role as a bear killer (1 Sm 17:34-37). Since a blow from a bear’s paw can be fatal, David’s courage and strength as a young shepherd in running after a bear and wrenching one of his father’s sheep from its jaws were noteworthy.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical passages seem to imply that bears attacked for no apparent reason (e.g., Prv 28:15; Am 5:19). At other times they were God’s instruments of punishment, as in the story of Elisha and the two she-bears (2 Kgs 2:24). The bear and the lion, often mentioned together in the Bible (1 Sm 17:37), were the two largest and strongest beasts of prey in the Holy Land. Thus they symbolized both strength and terror (Am 5:19).<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times bears seem to have roamed all over Palestine. Today they are found only in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains, and even there they are rare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bee\">Bee<\/p>\n<p>One of two domesticated insects <em>(Apis mellifica),<\/em> the other being the silkworm. Bees gather nectar from flowers, transferring pollen from one flower to another in the process. It is believed that they convey the location of sources of nectar to other bees through a bee “dance,” which may indicate both distance and direction. Bees are sensitive to four colors: blue-green, yellow-green, blue-violet, and ultra-violet (invisible to humans).<\/p>\n<p>The wild bees of the Holy Land are especially noted for their ferocity in attack. Only the female “worker” bees sting people and animals, the virulence of their venom increasing in warm weather. A number of biblical passages allude to the irritable, vindictive nature of bees and to the painful stings they inflict (Dt 1:44; Ps 118:12; Is 7:18).<\/p>\n<p>One reference calls attention to the fact that in semidesert regions a dead animal’s carcass, stripped to the bone by jackals or vultures and dried in the sun, can provide wild bees an excellent place to start a new colony (Jgs 14:5-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians considered the bee sacred. In ancient Greece candles were made from beeswax. In the Holy Land, beekeeping was probably not practiced until the Hellenistic period (second century <span>BC<\/span>), although Ezekiel 27:17 suggests that it may have been practiced earlier. If domestic honey was not available to the Hebrews, wild honey certainly was, and travelers would be on the lookout for caches of honey in rocky clefts and other likely places. The Philistines and the Hittites practiced beekeeping in their cities.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible contains many references to bees and bee products. A bee swarm was a valuable asset, though the price of honey itself was low. Honey was sometimes eaten with the honeycomb (Sg 5:1). Honey also had uses other than food, e.g., in embalming.<\/p>\n<p>The land of Israel was described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Honey was a major source of sweetening in the ancient Near East—hence, its importance (cf. Jgs 14:8-9). Actually the Hebrew word for “honey” may include not only bee honey but also the sweet syrup extracted from such fruits as figs, dates, and grapes. Thus “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex 3:8, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not necessarily stand for a land of bees but for a land rich in sweetness.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Honey.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Behemoth\">Behemoth<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Hippopotamus (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Camel\">Camel<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of burden. Unintelligent, ill-natured, and quarrelsome, the camel <em>(Camelus dromedarius)<\/em> is nevertheless a blessing to people living in the desert and on its borders because it is especially adapted to that habitat. It has been called the ship of the desert. Having thick elastic pads of fibrous tissue on its feet, it can walk on hot desert sands. It can go without water for long periods and can subsist on vegetation growing on the saline soils. The camel’s nostrils are pinched together and can be closed at will to prevent penetration of sand during violent sandstorms.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are used for transporting both goods and people. A person riding a camel can cover from 60 to 75 miles (96.5 to 121 kilometers) in a day. A camel can carry a load weighing 600 pounds (272 kilograms) or more. Camels were used heavily in the spice trade (Gn 37:25) and traveled regularly in camel trains between Arabia, Egypt, and Assyria. They were also ridden in time of war (Jgs 6:5). A camel can even be hitched to a plow in areas where the land is cultivated.<\/p>\n<p>The hair shed by camels during the early spring is preserved and used in weaving cloth and making tents. As much as 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) of hair can be obtained from one camel. A rough cloak of camel’s hair, as worn by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4), is still worn by Bedouins today. A camel’s hair garment was also the sign of the prophetic office (Zec 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of camel occur within the one-humped species, the slow burden-bearing camel referred to in Genesis 37:25 and the fast dromedary of 1 Samuel 30:17. The dromedary can stand seven feet (2.1 meters) tall and measure as much as nine feet (2.7 meters) from the muzzle to the tip of the tail. With its three-chambered stomach, which can hold from 15 to 30 quarts (14.2 to 28.4 liters) of liquid, it can go for as long as 5 days during the summer or 25 days in winter without drinking. The camel’s hump is a reserve store of fat, making it possible for the animal to subsist on very little food during a desert journey.<\/p>\n<p>Another species of camel, the Bactrian camel <em>(Camelus bactrianus),<\/em> is also resident in the Holy Land. It has two humps. It is heavier, bigger, and has longer hair than the one-humped camel and is slower than the swift dromedary. Isaiah 21:7 may refer to the Bactrian camel; both kinds of camel are referred to in Esther 8:10 (<span>kjv<\/span>). Camels ranked in importance with sheep, cattle, and asses in OT times. A third of the 66 biblical references to the camel lists it with other animals.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are ruminants (cud-chewing mammals) but do not have cloven hooves. Thus, they were included in the list of unclean beasts, forbidden by the Israelites as food (Lv 11:4; Dt 14:7). They are eaten by Arabs, however, who also drink their milk (cf. Gn 32:15).<\/p>\n<p>Abraham had camels in Egypt (Gn 12:16). At first Job had 3,000 camels (Jb 1:3) and after his recovery, 6,000 (Jb 42:12). Although wide use of camels does not seem to have begun until shortly before 1000 <span>BC<\/span> (Jgs 6:5), Sumerian texts from the Old Babylonian period list camels and indicate that they had been domesticated. Camel bones and figurines have been found at various eastern archaeological sites dating from well before 1200 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Caterpillar\">Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>Larval stage of insects characterized by complete metamorphosis. Such insects pass through four stages: egg, larva or caterpillar, pupa, and adult. Bees, flies, moths, and butterflies all pass through a larval or caterpillar stage.<\/p>\n<p>The word “caterpillar” occurs three times in the <span>nlt<\/span> (1 Kgs 8:37; 2 Chr 6:28; Ps 78:46). In the book of Joel that same Hebrew word is translated “locust” (1:4; 2:25, <span>nlt<\/span>). The locust and grasshopper to which the Hebrew word refers have an incomplete type of metamorphosis with only three stages: egg, nymph, and adult. The nymph is a miniature adult in which the wings are not fully developed, though their outline may be present. There are several nymph stages known as instars. The reference is to one of the last instars, in which the wing structures are still folded together and enclosed in a sac but are nevertheless clearly recognizable. That form of the insect is about an inch (2.5 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cattle\">Cattle<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animals of the bovine species <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> The OT often emphasized the beauty of cattle. Egypt was rich in cattle, especially in the Nile River delta area (Goshen), where the Hebrews settled under Joseph.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars believe that milk rather than meat was the foremost consideration in the domestication of cattle and that in early civilizations meat supplies came chiefly from wild game. Cattle also supplied strong hides that supplanted wood in the manufacture of shields. Their dung was a source of fuel when wood was scarce (Ez 4:15). They were used as beasts of burden and for plowing. Development of wheeled transportation was associated more closely with cattle than with any other animal.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical term “cattle” often refers to all domesticated animals or livestock (Gn 1:24; 2:20; 7:23; 47:6, 16-17; Ex 9:3-7; Nm 3:41, 45). Occasionally, the term was used to refer to all large domestic animals (Nm 31:9; 32:26), although sometimes the word as used in the <span>kjv<\/span> refers only to sheep and goats (Gn 30:32, 39, 43; 31:8, 10; Is 7:25; 43:23).<\/p>\n<p>Probably several kinds of cattle were domesticated in the Holy Land. Small, short-legged, black or brown shorthorn cattle were found in the southern part of Judah; that type submitted easily to the yoke and was prominent in agricultural operations. Along the coast a larger variety was found, and the wild districts east of the Jordan River were populated with a breed of huge black cattle.<\/p>\n<p>Cattle breeding was widely practiced by the patriarchs (cf. Gn 32:15; Jb 21:10). Strict laws in Mesopotamia, as well as in Israel, penalized the owner of a bull that gored a man or other cattle (Ex 21:28-36). Bulls were sometimes employed figuratively as pictures of strength or violence (Dt 33:17; Pss 22:12; 68:30; Is 10:13). For breeding purposes one bull is normally adequate for about 30 cows, but many more were kept since bulls were widely used in Israel for sacrifices. They might be used as a general sacrifice (Lv 22:23; Nm 23:1) or for special sacrifices (Jgs 6:25; 1 Sm 1:24). Particular sacrifices were offered at the consecration of priests (Ex 29:1), consecration of an altar (Nm 7), purification of the Levites (Nm 8), sin offerings (Lv 16), day of the new moon (Nm 28:11-14), Passover (Nm 28:19), Feast of Weeks (Nm 28:27), Feast of Trumpets (Nm 29:1-2), Day of Atonement (Nm 29:7-9), and the Feast of Tabernacles (Nm 29:12-38). The Feast of Tabernacles required the largest number of bulls for burnt offerings of all the annual feasts, with a total of 71 being slaughtered during the course of eight days.<\/p>\n<p>Calves were sometimes referred to as “sons of the herd” in the original Hebrew (Gn 18:8; 1 Sm 6:7; 14:32). The calf, a symbol of peacefulness (Is 11:6), was also used figuratively to refer to the weak (Ps 68:30). A calf’s head decorated the back of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:19). Calves were sometimes fattened in stalls to keep them from running off weight in the field (Am 6:4; Mal 4:2; Lk 15:23) or were kept around the house; the witch of Endor kept a calf in her house that she killed and served to Saul and his men (1 Sm 28:24-25). Calves supplied veal (Gn 18:7), considered a delicacy by the wealthy; Amos referred to stall-fattened calves in a denunciation of luxurious and careless living (Am 6:4). Calves also supplied meat for all Saul’s armies at the great slaughter of the Philistines (1 Sm 14:32). The “fatted calf” served roasted or boiled was gourmet fare, suitable for the finest banquet (Gn 18:7; Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Cattle were subject to the law of firstlings (Ex 13:12). They were a mark of wealth (Gn 13:2) and were considered proper booty of war (Jos 8:2). Aaron, the first high priest, made a golden calf as a rival to the ark of the covenant (Ex 32; Dt 9:16, 21). Even though he represented the calf as an image of the invisible God, it was especially offensive because the calf was a fertility symbol related to Egyptian and Canaanite practices. Two calves were later made by Jeroboam I of Israel (930–909 <span>BC<\/span>) for his shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28-33). Hosea’s prophetic denunciations of calf worship were directed at those shrines (Hos 8:5-6; 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>An ox is an adult castrated bull. A steer is a young ox. Oxen were used to do work (Nm 7:3; Dt 22:10; 25:4), though for moving heavy objects, cows were typically favored over bulls because of their more docile nature. Oxen were also used as pack animals (1 Chr 12:40, although they did not have the endurance of the ass, camel, or mule. They usually fed on grass (Nm 22:4; Ps 106:20), but they also ate straw (Is 11:7) and salted fodder (Is 30:24) and could be kept in a stable (Lk 13:15). Oxen could not be offered as sacrifices because they had been castrated (Lv 22:24). They could be used for food but were rarely eaten. Possession of an ox and an ass was regarded as the bare minimum for existence in the ancient Palestinian agriculture economy (Jb 24:3; cf. Ex 20:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Agriculture; Food and Food Preparation; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chameleon\">Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>Lizard characterized by its ability to change color according to its surroundings <em>(Chameleon vulgaris).<\/em> To the Israelites the chameleon was ritually unclean (Lv 11:30). The Hebrew word for chameleon is derived from a word meaning “to pant.” A lizard’s lungs are very large, and in ancient times lizards were believed to live on air. A chameleon’s eyes move independently of each other; so at times one eye may be turned upward and the other downward. Chameleons live in trees and bushes, clinging to branches with their long tails.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Coral\">Coral<\/p>\n<p>Calcareous (lime-containing) skeletons of relatively simple marine organisms <em>(Corallium rubrum).<\/em> Red coral from the Mediterranean and Red Seas is widely used for jewelry and for medicinal purposes. While the animal is alive, the coral is green in color and shrublike in appearance, looking rather like an underwater plant since the coral animals are immobil. When the coral is removed from the water, it becomes hard and red in color.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient times coral was sometimes used as money, along with precious stones, pearls, and gold. Some believe the biblical reference in Lamentations 4:7 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is to pearls rather than to coral, but it is probable that the references in Job 28:18 and Ezekiel 27:16 are to the red coral (see <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cricket\">Cricket<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the order Orthptera related to grasshoppers and locusts. According to Leviticus 11:22, the cricket was edible. The reference may be to one of the growth stages of the locust.<\/p>\n<p>The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word as “beetle.” Beetles are insects with chewing mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the fore pair being hard and sheathlike and the hind pair being membranous and folded under the fore pair. Some beetles are carnivorous, others are chiefly herbivorous. Some are aquatic, some produce a secretion that blisters the skin, some damage fabrics, some damage crops, and some feed on other insects that are harmful to humans. In ancient Egypt the beetle, or sacred scarab, was a symbol of the sun god Ra. Scarab seals and amulets were extremely popular in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Crocodile\">Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all existing reptiles <em>(Crocodilus vulgaris),<\/em> attaining a length of well over 20 feet (6 meters). Crocodiles are characterized by large lizardlike bodies supported by short legs. The head terminates in a flattened snout armed with strong conical teeth, each of which is implanted in a distinct socket. New teeth growing from beneath continually replace those in use. The toes are webbed. The back and tail are protected by quadrangular horny shields of varying sizes arranged in regular rows and in contact with one another at the edges. The eyes are covered with movable lids that can be closed when the animal enters the water.<\/p>\n<p>The crocodile spends most of its time in the water where it feeds mainly on fish but also on aquatic birds and even small animals that come down to the water’s edge to drink. It is surprisingly fast and agile on dry land, even though its legs are so short that its belly and tail drag across the earth leaving a distinct path.<\/p>\n<p>Until the beginning of the 20th century, the crocodile was found in the marshes and small coastal rivers of western Palestine. A first-century Roman writer, Pliny, referred to a place in the Holy Land called Crocodeilopolis (“crocodile city”) to the south of Mt Carmel, and visitors to the Holy Land as late as the 19th century reported seeing crocodiles in that general region.<\/p>\n<p>The description of “Leviathan” in Job 41 seems to be based on the crocodile (thus the translation of the <span>nlt<\/span>). The “dragon” of Ezekiel 29:3, used figuratively of the Egyptian pharaoh, may be a reference to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deer\">Deer<\/p>\n<p>Large ruminant (cud-chewing) animals. Only the males have antlers (branching horns). Deer antlers grow annually and are solid, in contrast to those of the antelope and the gazelle. Fully developed antlers are devoid of any covering of skin or horn and, for all practical purposes, may be regarded as a mass of dead bone carried for a certain time by the living animal.<\/p>\n<p>The end of the deer’s muzzle is naked in all species. The stomach is divided into a series of compartments, some of which are used to store partly chewed food. The food is later regurgitated, rechewed, and finally swallowed into a section of the stomach where true digestion takes place.<\/p>\n<p>Three species of deer were known in Palestine: the red deer <em>(Cervus elaphus),<\/em> the Persian fallow deer <em>(Dama mesopotamica),<\/em> and the roe deer <em>(Capreolus capreolus).<\/em> All are now extinct there. The last deer were hunted in the Holy Land in 1914. The red deer referred to in the Bible as “hart” (male), “stag” (male), or “hind” (female) stood about four feet (1.2 meters) high at the shoulder. It was gregarious (living in herds or flocks), each group remaining in a definite territory. Red deer grazed and browsed during the morning and late afternoon (Lam 1:6). The sexes remained in separate herds. The red deer was known for its leaping (Is 35:6) and sure-footedness in the mountains (Ps 18:33; Sg 2:8-9, 17; 8:14; Hb 3:19).<\/p>\n<p>The antlers of the Persian fallow deer (1 Kgs 4:23) were large, flattened, and palmated (shaped like an open palm with fingers extended), and its coat was a yellowbrown. It traveled in small groups, feeding mainly on grass in the morning and evening.<\/p>\n<p>The roe deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23) was a small, graceful animal, dark reddish brown in summer and yellowish gray in winter. Its antlers were about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and had three points. The roe deer preferred sparsely wooded valleys and the lower slopes of mountains, grazing in open grasslands. It usually associated in family groups made up of the doe and her offspring. They were shy, yet very curious. The roe deer barked like a dog when disturbed, and they were excellent swimmers.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the roe deer is actually referred to in such passages as 1 Kings 4:23; references may be to the fallow deer, although that animal does not seem to have lived in the southern part of Palestine around the Sinai Desert because of its need for ample amounts of food and water. Fallow deer were found in northern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The hart (the male red deer) was listed among the clean beasts that Jewish law permitted as food (Dt 12:15, 22; 14:5), but deer were not listed among the animals appropriate for sacrifice. The hind (female red deer) normally gave birth to one calf at a time, though twins were born with some degree of regularity (Jb 39:1; Ps 29:9, <span>kjv<\/span>; Jer 14:5). The gestation period was about 40 weeks. When it was about to give birth, the hind looked for a secure hiding place, preferably in the dense undergrowth of the forest where it could find natural protection for the tiny calf. During the first few days after birth, the mother never went far from her young. The fawn was able to stand on its own legs a few hours after birth. The solicitous care by the hind for her calf during the first days of its life is hinted at in a touching way in Jeremiah 14:4-5, where only a severe drought is said to drive the hind from her calf. Job 39:1-4 describes the calving of the hinds. The hind illustrated grace and charm (Gn 49:21; Prv 5:19), and its dark, gentle eyes and graceful limbs were used to describe the beauty of a woman (Prv 5:18-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dog\">Dog<\/p>\n<p>Probably the earliest domesticated animal <em>(Canis familiaris),<\/em> used very early in hunting. The modern dog is believed to have come from the Indian wolf <em>(Canis lupus pallipes).<\/em> The dogs of biblical times probably looked like a modern German shepherd, with short pointed ears, a pointed nose, and a long tail.<\/p>\n<p>The dog was generally looked down upon in biblical times (Prv 26:11; 2 Pt 2:22). The biblical writers did not share modern sentiments about dogs being man’s best friends. The dog was pictured as a scavenger, haunting streets and dumps (Ex 22:31; 1 Kgs 22:38; Mt 15:26; Lk 16:21). Human corpses could become the spoil of dogs (2 Kgs 9:35-36). In general, dogs served the same function as vultures and other birds of prey. Most of the 41 references in the Scriptures to dogs show strong disfavor. Dogs were considered cowardly, filthy creatures.<\/p>\n<p>Dogs used in hunting occur in paintings in Egyptian tombs, and there is a reference to dogs herding sheep in Job 30:1. One good quality of dogs highly esteemed by the Israelites was watchfulness (Is 56:10). In general, however, in biblical times “dog” was a term of contempt (1 Sm 17:43; 2 Sm 16:9) and was used of overly submissive persons (2 Sm 9:8; 2 Kgs 8:13) and of evil persons (Is 56:10-11; Mt 7:6; Phil 3:2; Rv 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>Dogs, like pigs, were voracious and omnivorous (eating any kind of food). In response to a Gentile woman’s request that he heal her daughter, Jesus used the metaphor of throwing household food scraps to dogs (Mt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30). At the time of Jesus, the word “dog” was a standard Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles who, like dogs, were considered unclean, although the diminutive form of the word, used by Jesus, softened this considerably. Seeing her faith, Jesus granted the woman’s request, giving a non-Jew some of “the children’s bread.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Donkey\">Donkey<\/p>\n<p>Beast of burden. The donkey of the Holy Land <em>(Equus asinus)<\/em> was quite different from the European donkey of today, which is usually a small, stubborn animal. In biblical times the donkey was a beautiful, stately, friendly animal. Its color was usually reddish brown. Three wild races have been described, all from Africa. The race from northwest Africa is extinct; the one from northeast Africa, if not extinct, is close to extinction; the Somalian race, which survives, did not play an important part in domestication. The northeast African race, the Nubian donkey, was evidently domesticated in the Nile River region in early historic times. The donkey was used as a mount from the time of domestication on. It is first mentioned in the Bible among the animals that Abraham acquired in Egypt (Gn 12:16). The donkey was primarily a beast of burden, driven but not bridled. From the time of the Middle Kingdom on (c. 2040 <span>BC<\/span>), it was used for riding in Egypt, but only the Jews and Nubians rode donkeys regularly. The donkey was also used for threshing grain and for pulling the plow. In Arab countries today peasants plow with a donkey and a cow or camel hitched together. In Israel the law forbade plowing with a donkey and an ox hitched together (Dt 22:10). Until the time of Solomon (960 <span>BC<\/span>), horses were not used in Palestine. From that time on, the horse was ridden by warriors; the donkey was used by those who were traveling peaceably.<\/p>\n<p>The donkey was held in high regard by the Jews and was considered an economic asset. An individual had to have a donkey for minimum existence (Jb 24:3), and wealth was frequently counted by the number of donkeys one possessed (Gn 12:16; 24:35). The donkey was considered an acceptable gift (Gn 32:13-15). It was allowed to rest on the Sabbath (Dt 5:14). Women in biblical times often used the donkey as a riding animal (Jos 15:18; 1 Sm 25:23; 2 Kgs 4:24); often a special driver would help a woman guide the animal, running along at its side. If a married couple possessed only one donkey, the husband usually walked alongside while the wife rode (Ex 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel returning from Babylon had ten times as many donkeys as horses and camels (Ezr 2:66-67; Neh 7:68-69). Job’s wealth was indicated by the fact that he had 500 she-donkeys before catastrophe hit him (Jb 1:3); after his recovery he had 1,000 donkeys (Jb 42:12). Joseph’s brothers used donkeys to transport the grain they purchased in Egypt (Gn 42:26; 43:24). Abigail transported food on donkeys to David and his troops during their conflict with Saul (1 Sm 25:18). David assigned one of the 12 managers of his royal estates to look after his donkeys exclusively (1 Chr 27:30).<\/p>\n<p>The onager, or Syrian wild donkey <em>(Equus hemionus hemihippus)<\/em>, is an intermediate between the true horse and the true donkey. Its ears are longer than those of a horse but shorter than those of a donkey. The front hooves are narrow; there are chestnuts (callouslike spots on the inside of the knees) on the front legs only, and the tail is short haired for a long distance from its root so that it appears to be tufted.<\/p>\n<p>The Sumerians (ancient Mesopotamians) were able to domesticate the onager, which was eventually replaced by the horse. It was used to draw chariots in Ur; a number of onagers were buried with their vehicles in a royal grave that dates from about 2500 <span>BC<\/span>. Later the wild onager was a favorite hunter’s prize for Babylonian and Assyrian kings.<\/p>\n<p>The onager was very common in the steppe lands near Israel, where it was described as a freedom-loving desert animal (Jb 24:5; 39:5-8; Ps 104:11; Is 32:14; Jer 2:24; Hos 8:9). Ishmael was described as “free and untamed as a wild donkey” (Gn 16:12, <span>nlt<\/span>)—that is, one who could not adjust to domestic life. Drought seems to have been responsible for the population decline of the onager in biblical times (Jer 14:6). The modern onager <em>(Equus hemionus onager)<\/em> is slightly larger than the Syrian wild donkey that is extinct.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dragon\">Dragon<\/p>\n<p>Any one of a number of monstrous land and sea creatures. In biblical usage, “dragon” does not refer to the huge, fire-breathing, winged reptile of European folklore. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> used the term to translate two Hebrew words that are usually rendered more precisely in modern translations. One word referred to desert animals; most scholars agree with the <span>niv<\/span> that “jackals” is its proper meaning (Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; Jer 9:11; Mal 1:3). <em>See<\/em> Jackal (below).<\/p>\n<p>The other Hebrew word translated “dragon” is harder to define. It was frequently used in reference to serpents (so translated in the <span>rsv<\/span>: Ex 7:9-12; Dt 32:33; Ps 91:13). In other <span>rsv<\/span> passages it is translated “sea monster” (Gn 1:21; Jb 7:12; Ps 148:7). The exact identity of such sea monsters is not known. Several <span>rsv<\/span> passages retain the English “dragon.” In two of them (Ps 74:13; Is 27:1), the context indicates that sea monsters are meant. In three others (Is 51:9; Ez 29:3; 32:2) “dragon” seems to refer to the crocodile, a figurative reference to the Egyptian pharaoh at the time of the exodus. Jeremiah 51:34 (translated “monster” in the <span>rsv<\/span>) may also refer to a voracious creature such as a crocodile. <em>See<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p>Babylonian myths described monsters and dragons in primordial conflict with the god Marduk; they represented the principle of evil. In its figurative usages in Scripture, “dragon” has a similar significance, especially in the prophetic books. In the book of Revelation it is a symbol of Satan, the archenemy of God and his people (Rv 12:3-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fish\">Fish<\/p>\n<p>Aquatic animals frequently mentioned in the Bible without names or descriptions that enable us to identify the particular species. Since time immemorial, fish have constituted one of the staple foods of humanity, and they still serve as the chief source of protein in many parts of the world. The trade in fish was highly developed in biblical times. For example, one of the gates in Jerusalem was called the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3; Zep 1:10). The law in Leviticus 11:9-12 permitted the Jews to eat fish, but only those having both fins and scales. Scaleless fish such as catfish were forbidden, even though they had fins.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian paintings depict various methods of fishing, and the Philistines fished in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the people of Israel were not a seafaring nation, it is safe to assume that most of their fish came from freshwater lakes and rivers, especially the Sea of Galilee. Some 36 species of fish have been identified in that lake, including varieties of perch, carp, barbel, “sardine,” and catfish.<\/p>\n<p>The method of fishing characteristic of NT times was the dragnet. After a boat had put out into the deep (Lk 5:4), a large net would be thrown out from it and then dragged toward shore by the rowers in the boat, possibly with the help of a crew in another boat. The catch was sorted out on shore (Mt 13:47-48). Fishing was usually carried out at night when the coolness of the water brought fish closer to the surface and when they could not see the approaching nets.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews also fished by hook and line (Mt 17:27), a few by spear (Jb 41:7), and some by the throw net (Ez 47:10). Habakkuk refers to hook-and-line fishing, netting, and seining (1:15).<\/p>\n<p>Very early in the history of the Christian church the fish became a symbol for Christ and the faith. It was scratched on the walls of Roman catacombs and may be seen today decorating walls, altars, pews, and vestments. The symbol came into use because the Greek word for “fish” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ichthus<\/span><em>)<\/em> is composed of the first letter of each word in the Greek phrase “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” <em>See<\/em> Whale (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Flea\">Flea<\/p>\n<p>Tiny, irritating insect (1 Sm 24:14; 26:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many species of fleas occur in Palestine, the most common being <em>Pulex irritans.<\/em> About a thousand species are known around the world. Fleas are wingless parasites that have sharp jaws and suck out blood from the bodies of humans and animals. The body is wedge shaped, enabling the flea to burrow into folds of skin and hide there. The eggs, laid by the female in dust heaps in the corners of rooms, hatch into small, white larvae that pupate (a nonfeeding stage) in a cocoon. Soon adult fleas appear that immediately attach themselves to the body of a host. The female requires blood for the development of her eggs.<\/p>\n<p>A flea bite is painful and causes some swelling and itching. Fleas are attracted by warmth. With favorable moisture and temperature, adult fleas can live a year or longer without food, but they are voracious feeders. The most dangerous fleas are those of the rat that transmit the organism responsible for bubonic plague. There were 41 recorded epidemics of bubonic plague before the Christian era.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fly\">Fly<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the order Diptera, which have one pair of wings. Many winged insects of other orders, however, are also called flies, such as the dragonfly or butterfly.<\/p>\n<p>As in almost all parts of the world, flies are abundant in Palestine. One of the most numerous is the common housefly <em>(Musca domestica),<\/em> found chiefly around dung heaps and garbage. The female lays her eggs, out of which emerge white maggots that feed on refuse. After a few days the maggot develops into a cocoon out of which emerges the adult housefly. In the summer the whole cycle lasts about 12 days, so that a fly can breed about 20 generations a year.<\/p>\n<p>Another fly common to Palestine is the botfly (family Oestridae). It causes much discomfort among livestock by irritating them and spreading diseases. Tabanid flies (family Tabanidae), including the horsefly (genus <em>Tabanus<\/em>) and related species, are also found in Palestine. Both the botfly and horsefly are known as gadflies because of the persistent distress they inflict. Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar is spoken of as a gadfly in view of his invasion of Egypt (Jer 46:20).<\/p>\n<p>The fourth plague in Egypt just before the exodus featured “swarms of flies” (Ex 8:21-31, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Pss 78:45; 105:31). Those swarms may have been made up of any or all the flies mentioned above. The maggots mentioned in Job 25:6 and Isaiah 14:11 and the worms in Exodus 16:24 and Job 7:5 and 17:14 were probably fly larvae.<\/p>\n<p>A proverb quoted in Ecclesiastes 10:1 probably refers to the housefly, which would be attracted to an open, perfumed ointment bottle. Once inside it would drown and eventually decay, causing the ointment to spoil and stink. The fly is also referred to in Isaiah 7:18 where it symbolizes Egypt. Isaiah may have had in mind a horsefly <em>(Tabanus arenivagus)<\/em> that attacks both humans and animals.<\/p>\n<p>Philistine inhabitants of the city of Ekron worshiped a god named Baal-zebul, meaning “Lord of the high places.” The Hebrews mockingly spoke of Baal-zebub, meaning “Lord of the flies” (2 Kgs 1:2). The NT form is Beelzebub (e.g., Mt 10:25; 12:24, 27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fox\">Fox<\/p>\n<p>Small, doglike carnivore with a bushy tail that is about half its body length. The red fox of the Holy Land <em>(Vulpes palaetinae)<\/em> is similar to the North American red fox; it is smaller than a wolf and is normally a nocturnal solitary animal. The omnivorous fox eats almost any kind of food—fruits, plants, mice, beetles, and birds—but seldom touches carrion. It loves the sweet juice of grapes, but it also burrows underground tunnels that can destroy the vines (Sg 2:15). The fox is intelligent and known for its slyness (Lk 13:32). It has considerable endurance and can run at speeds up to 30 miles (48 kilometers) per hour. The Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall were taunted by the wisecrack that even a fox jumping on their wall would knock it over (Neh 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptian fox <em>(Vulpes niloticus)<\/em> is found in the central and southern parts of the Holy Land. It is somewhat smaller than the common red fox. Its back is rust colored and its belly light. The Syrian fox <em>(Vulpes flavescens)<\/em> that lives in the northern part of the Holy Land is shiny gold in color.<\/p>\n<p>Some OT references such as Psalm 63:10 and Lamentations 5:18 are translated “fox” in the <span>kjv<\/span> but probably refer to jackals. Jackals, not foxes, hunt in packs and tend to act as scavengers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Frog\">Frog<\/p>\n<p>Amphibian (genus <em>Rana<\/em>), living part of its life in the water and part on land.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs and toads are covered with soft, hairless skin and lack a tail in the adult stage. The hind legs are much longer and more powerfully developed than the forelegs so that the animals are able to jump large distances. It has been suggested that the frog referred to in Scripture is an edible one, <em>Rana ridibunda,<\/em> one of the aquatic frogs found in Egypt and in the stagnant waters of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The female frog lays her eggs in the water; after about a week the eggs hatch into tadpoles. Gradually through metamorphosis the tail is lost and limbs are acquired. Frogs must maintain a moist skin since they take oxygen through the skin as well as through their lungs; thus they must always remain close to water. They feed on insects and worms.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs are found throughout the Palestinian lowlands, where their croaking is heard in the spring and on summer evenings. The Israelites seem to have associated frogs primarily with sliminess and foulness. They fell into the category of creeping or swarming creatures, which in general were ritually unclean (Lv 11:29-31). Since the frog was not specifically listed, however, rabbis did not consider it one of the animals that defiled human beings through contact.<\/p>\n<p>In Revelation 16:13 certain foul spirits are said to look like frogs. The ancient Egyptians made the frog a symbol of life and birth and an image of Heqet, the patron goddess of birth. She is depicted with a frog’s head giving life to the newborn. Thus that deity was discredited when the power of God afflicted Egypt in the second of the ten plagues on the Egyptians with the very animal that was her symbol (Ex 8:1-14; Pss 78:45; 105:30). The frog in question may have been the spotted frog of Egypt <em>(Rana punctata,<\/em> or <em>Rana ridibunda).<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gazelle\">Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>Small, dainty, graceful antelope with hollow recurved horns on both sexes. Two varieties exist in the Holy Land, the dorcas gazelle <em>(Gazella dorcas),<\/em> which is pale fawn in color and up to 22 inches (56 centimeters) tall, and the Arabian gazelle <em>(Gazella arabica),<\/em> which is a dark smoky color and up to 25 inches (63.5 centimeters) tall.<\/p>\n<p>Gazelles are still quite common throughout the desert and steppe areas of the Holy Land, especially in the Negev Desert. Herds usually consist of from 5 to 10 animals, but some varieties assemble in large migratory herds in the fall to relocate to lower elevations and new feeding grounds. Gazelles are herbivorous (plant eating). They are very shy and post guards to warn the herd of approaching danger.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times the gazelle was probably the game animal most hunted by the Jews (Prv 6:5; Is 13:14). Pharaoh Tutankhamen hunted gazelles and ostriches. The gazelle is said to have graced Solomon’s table (1 Kgs 4:23). Gazelles were not easy to catch because of their great speed (2 Sm 2:18; 1 Chr 12:8; Prv 6:5); they surpass the deer in swiftness. They were trapped in various ways—encircled with nets, driven into enclosures with pitfalls, or forced into narrow valleys and shot with arrows. The Bedouin hunt gazelle with falcons and dogs; the falcon annoys the gazelle, striking it on the head and injuring it so that the dogs can overtake it.<\/p>\n<p>The gazelle is referred to in Song of Songs 2:9, 17; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14, where it is an image of feminine beauty.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gecko\">Gecko<\/p>\n<p>Reptile of the family Gekkonidae, referred to in Leviticus 11:30. In Jewish food law it was a ritually unclean lizard. There are seven species of geckos in the Holy Land (including <em>Hemidactylus turcicus<\/em> and <em>Ptyodactylus hasselquistii,<\/em> all insectivorous—insect eating). The gecko makes a low mourning sound by vibrating its tongue rapidly against the roof of its mouth. In legend the gecko was said to cause leprosy by crawling across a person’s body.<\/p>\n<p>Another name for the gecko is the wall lizard, so named because it can walk upside down on ceilings with the aid of the suction discs on its toes—but it often plops down into the middle of the home. Since it was considered unclean, such an intrusion would have been a disgusting nuisance to Jewish households (Lv 11:31-38).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gnat\">Gnat<\/p>\n<p>Any very small fly, in common and biblical usage. According to the <span>nlt<\/span>, the third plague in Egypt before the exodus consisted of gnats (Ex 8:16-18; Ps 105:31). The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word there as “lice,” but the breeding pattern described in Exodus 8—insects rising from the dust—seems to fit gnats better than lice. Since “gnat” is a general term, the small flies of that plague may have included several small species such as mosquitos, harvester gnats, midges, or sand flies.<\/p>\n<p>The sand fly inflicts a far more painful bite than the mosquito. Further, it does not betray itself by a buzzing noise in flight and is so small that it penetrates most mosquito netting.<\/p>\n<p>Gnats were drawn to wine while it was fermenting. The Pharisees in particular would strain their wine to avoid consuming unclean insects (Mt 23:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Goat\">Goat<\/p>\n<p>Cloven-hooved mammals (genus <em>Capra<\/em>) with large eyes and big, floppy ears that constantly twitch. Both males and females have backward arching horns. The Palestinian goat is a ruminant (cud-chewing animal) of lighter build than the sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was probably the earliest ruminant to be domesticated. Its wild ancestor seems to have been the Gezoar goat <em>(Capra aegagrus).<\/em> Wild goats are believed to have been domesticated very early in Palestine. The goat of Bible times was probably the Syrian or Mamber variety <em>(Capra hircus mambrica).<\/em> Domesticated goats may have as many as four kids in a litter, whereas wild goats bear only one or two.<\/p>\n<p>The Palestinian goat was commonly black. Speckled and spotted goats were a rarity, and for that reason Jacob’s request for those goats in Genesis 30:32 appeared very modest. There may also have been red goats (cf. 1 Sm 16:12; 19:13, where goat’s hair was used to imitate David’s hair, which was “ruddy” or auburn).<\/p>\n<p>Almost every part of the goat was used by the Israelites. The whole goat was used for sacrifice. Its flesh served as meat (Lv 7:23; Dt 14:4), and it was the principal source of milk (Prv 27:27). Goats were sheared in the late spring, and the goat hair was used for weaving tent cloth and for various domestic purposes (Ex 36:14; 1 Sm 19:13, 16). The tabernacle at Mt Sinai was made of goat’s hair blankets (Ex 26:7).<\/p>\n<p>Adult male goats were generally not eaten because of their strong flavor and toughness and also because they were necessary to insure the flock’s increase. Young kids, however, were usually the chief meat for a feast and were offered to visitors as a symbol of hospitality. Goat milk is richer than the milk of cows and sheep and evidently had broader uses. A good goat gives three quarts of milk a day, from which a rich butter and buttermilk can be made. The average Hebrew family could have lived almost entirely on a single goat’s production.<\/p>\n<p>Goatskin was tanned as leather, and the whole hide was turned into a skin bottle by sewing shut leg and neck apertures (Gn 21:14; Jos 9:4). Goatskin had many uses, including the construction of Hebrew musical instruments. The nebal, a large harp, was made with goatskin for its base sound. Drums had goatskin coverings.<\/p>\n<p>Goats were herded with sheep in biblical times, but each group remained separate following its own bell-laden leader. Jesus was evidently referring to their common herding in his description of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Because of their wool, sheep are valued more than goats. However, where pasture and water are scarce and thorny shrubs dominate over grass, sheep are difficult to keep and goats become important. They can live under conditions that suit neither cows nor sheep, producing large quantities of milk. The goat does not supply fat as the sheep does, and since its hair is coarse its wool is rather scarce. Goat-hair cloth called cilicium was used to make tents.<\/p>\n<p>Goats have voracious appetites. They also were responsible for much damage done to the land of Palestine, breaking down terraces, destroying forests, and bringing about soil erosion by eating off all cover.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was recognized as a form of wealth, subject to the law of firstlings (Nm 18:17). It had to be eight days old before it could be offered as a sacrifice. A year-old male goat was one of the animals offered at the Passover (28:22), and two goats were offered on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:7-10). The goat was also used for other specific sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>The ibex, a type of wild goat <em>(Capra ibex nubiana),<\/em> still lives in small numbers on the cliffs close to the Dead Sea. That it was known in ancient times is evident from rock carvings. It is distinguished from the true wild goat by having a more compact rump and horns that are slender and curved back. Its slender legs and sharp cloven hooves enable it to cling to narrow rock ledges, to jump between them, and to climb steep cliffs.<\/p>\n<p>Usually the ibex is found in rugged mountain country among rocky crags and meadows just below the snow line (Ps 104:18). In Job 39:1 they are referred to as “mountain goats.” They frequently gather in herds of 5 to 20. They graze and browse, being active in the afternoon and sometimes feeding through the night. The large horn of the ibex was at one period made into the shofar that was blown in the second Jerusalem temple to announce the new year and the jubilee year.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was often used in a figurative and symbolic sense by the writers of the Bible: in Song of Songs 4:1 and 6:5 for the bride’s black hair; in Matthew 25:31-46 for the wicked; and in Ezekiel 34:17 and Daniel 8:5-8 for various human leaders.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Grasshopper\">Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>Large insects of the Orthoptera order. They have chewing or biting mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the front pair of which is narrow and somewhat thickened and the hind pair membranous and used for flying. When not in use the flight wings are folded beneath the protective front wings like a fan against the body. By rubbing their wings together, male grasshoppers produce sounds that both males and females can detect. Grasshoppers pass through a partial metamorphosis; the egg hatches into a juvenile nymph that looks like an adult except for its smaller size and undeveloped wings. After several months the nymph becomes a winged adult.<\/p>\n<p>The terms “grasshopper” and “locust” are often used interchangeably. Actually the locust is a kind of grasshopper. Also confusing is the fact that other insects such as cicadas are sometimes called locusts. The difference between grasshoppers and locusts depends more on behavior than appearance. Grasshoppers are individual insects that lead solitary lives and do not migrate. The same insects when migrating in a swarm are called migratory grasshoppers or locusts. Elimination of their food supply by drought, flood, or fire may lead to migration. Climatic factors such as a warm dry winter also stimulate migrations.<\/p>\n<p>Grasshoppers and locusts have been a staple food in the Middle East and also among the Indians of the American Southwest. To the Israelites the grasshopper was considered ritually clean and could be eaten (Lv 11:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hare\">Hare<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the genus and species <em>Lepus europaeus judaeus, Lepus capensis,<\/em> and <em>Lepus arabicus.<\/em> It is found in open country, often near or on cultivated lands, and in woods, usually deciduous rather than evergreen. It is an herbivorous rodent and is different from the rabbit, which is not found in Palestine. Although it is not a true ruminant according to modern classification (because it does not have a four-chambered stomach), the hare does rechew its food. It has a process of partial regurgitation of material too hard for the cells in the stomach to absorb initially; thus, the hare actually chews food previously swallowed.<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern hares have very long ears and large hind feet; their feet are well furred. They are similar to American jackrabbits, which are true hares. Hares do not dig or occupy burrows the way rabbits do. Hares are mainly nocturnal and spend their inactive hours hiding in vegetation. They eat grasses and herbaceous matter as well as twigs and young bark of woody plants. Hares breed with great rapidity—the young attaining sexual maturity at six months after birth.<\/p>\n<p>The hare was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:6; Dt 14:7), evidently because although it appeared to chew its cud, it did not have cloven hooves. Consumption of hares has also been forbidden among the Arabs, Chinese, and Lapps, but the hare was widely hunted by other people in ancient and modern times. Its great speed, prolific breeding, timidity, and caution have saved it from extermination by its many enemies.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hippopotamus\">Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of problematic interpretation. Some early interpreters thought it referred to the elephant, others to the wild ox, the mammoth, or any large animal. It was called “behemoth” by the <span>kjv<\/span> translators. Today it is generally agreed that the reference is to the hippopotamus <em>(Hippopotamus amphibius),<\/em> a large, thick-skinned, amphibious mammal, an ungulate (having hooflike toenails) with a large head, a bulky, hairless body, and short legs.<\/p>\n<p>The description in Job 40:15-24 fits closely the modern hippopotamus (see <span>nlt<\/span>), except for the depiction of the tail. At present the hippopotamus is found only in the rivers of Africa, but there is fossil evidence that it has existed in the Holy Land, perhaps in the swamps of northern Galilee and the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\n<p>The hippopotamus has highly developed sense organs, placed in such a way that it can see, hear, and smell almost without being seen; its eyes, ears, and nostrils can reach above water while the rest of the animal lies submerged. It has a large mouth, large tusks, and a short, heavy throat. The strong legs are so short that the belly almost reaches the ground when the animal is on the land. The hippopotamus lives on plants and herbs growing in rivers, but if food is scarce there, it forages on land, usually at night. In spite of its heavy body it is surprisingly agile on land.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Horse\">Horse<\/p>\n<p>Przewalski’s horse (<em>Equus przewalskii,<\/em> an eastern race that roamed about Mongolia until modern firearms destroyed most of them after World War I) and the tarpan (a western race of southern Russia that became extinct in the Ukraine in 1851). The domesticated horse <em>(Equus caballus)<\/em> seems to have been derived from the tarpan. The original site of domestication is believed to have been Turkestan, a region north of Afghanistan and India, now in Russia. The horse differs from the donkey in that it has shorter ears, a longer mane with a forelock, a long hairy tail, and a soft, sensitive muzzle.<\/p>\n<p>Horses were used in war not only for riding but also for pulling the heavy, springless war chariots. Two kinds of horses were needed for these different purposes, and the Hebrews distinguished between chariot horses and cavalry horses.<\/p>\n\n<p>The Lord warned the early Israelites against unnecessarily amassing military strength in the form of horses and thereby following the oppressive tactics of the powerful Egyptians (Dt 17:14-16), but the demands of war caused both David and Solomon to import horses from Egypt into their kingdoms and to breed them. Solomon greatly increased the number of horses in the Jewish kingdom and maintained large stables at various cities (1 Kgs 10:26) such as the regional defense centers of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15-19). Ahab’s horses are mentioned in 1 Kings 18:5, and records of Shalmaneser III state that Ahab furnished 2,000 chariots to a coalition against Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>In early Israel, the horse was opposed as a symbol of pagan luxury and of dependence on physical power for defense (Dt 17:16; 1 Sm 8:11; Ps 20:7; Is 31:1). Horse trading, mentioned as early as Genesis 47:17, was carried on by Solomon between Egypt and the Syro-Hittite principalities (1 Kgs 10:28-29). Most biblical references to horses refer to their use in war, but horses were also used for transportation. Riding seems to have been less popular than the use of chariots. Cavalry units were not introduced until the 12th century <span>BC<\/span> by the Medes. Joseph rode in Pharaoh’s second horse-drawn chariot (Gn 41:43), and Absalom made a display by riding a horse-drawn chariot (2 Sm 15:1). Naaman traveled by horse and chariot (2 Kgs 5:9). Later, horses were so common in Jerusalem that the royal palace had a special horse gate (2 Chr 23:15), and a gate of the city itself was known as the Horse Gate (Neh 3:28; Jer 31:40). Mordecai rode a royal horse of King Xerxes as a sign of honor (Est 6:8-11). Horses are often spoken of figuratively (Ps 32:9; “mare,” Sg 1:9; “stallions,” Jer 5:8; 12:5), especially in the context of judgment (Hb 3:8; Zec 1:8; 6:1-8; Rv 6:2-8; 9:17; 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Warfare; Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hyena\">Hyena<\/p>\n<p>Stocky carnivore <em>(Hyaena hyaena)<\/em> with coarse hair, an erect mane, and long hairs along the neck and back. Hyenas live in holes among rocks and banks. They are mainly nocturnal but are ordinarily neither noisy nor aggressive. Their cry, however, is a disagreeable, unearthly sound. Hyenas usually feed on carrion, crushing bones with their powerful jaws. If the carrion supply is inadequate, they will kill sheep, goats, or other small animals. When threatened, hyenas growl and erect their mane, but they rarely fight. They are massively built with forelegs longer than the hind legs.<\/p>\n<p>Known as scavengers in Africa, hyenas eat domestic refuse in the villages. In Palestine the striped hyena is a common predator, preferring rocky territory and even rock tombs. Since hyenas were notorious for raiding the graves of the dead, all Israelites who could afford it arranged for burial in tombs protected by massive stone doors. Absalom, King David’s son who was killed by Joab in the wild, was buried under a huge pile of stones to protect his corpse from molestation by hyenas (2 Sm 18:17).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Jackal\">Jackal<\/p>\n<p>Carnivore <em>(Canis aureus)<\/em> smaller than the true wolf and with a shorter tail. It is similar to the fox but has a broader head, shorter ears, and longer legs. The fox is solitary; the jackal tends to be gregarious. Its tail can be drooping or erect, compared with the long horizontal tail of the fox. Jackals usually prowl at night, either singly, in pairs, or in packs through open savannah country. They eat small mammals, poultry, fruit, vegetables, and carrion. They spend their days in thickets and clumps of vegetation. Often they obtain scraps from kills by larger carnivores. Jackals can run at speeds of about 33 miles (53 kilometers) per hour.<\/p>\n<p>The jackal can reach a height of about 20 inches (51 centimeters), roughly the size of a German shepherd dog. Its back is pale yellow with dark, almost black, flanks. Its lips are black and its ears white on the inside. The howl of the jackal sounds like the crying of a child or the heartrending wail of the bereaved (Mi 1:8; cf. Jb 30:29). To other jackals the howl is merely an invitation calling the pack together for its nocturnal hunting.<\/p>\n<p>OT references are chiefly to jackals prowling around ruined cities and wilderness areas (Neh 2:13; Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; Jer 9:11; 14:6; 49:33; 51:37; Lam 4:3; 5:18; Mal 1:3). Many such references are translated “dragon” in the <span>kjv<\/span>, but “jackal” is more appropriate.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leech\">Leech<\/p>\n<p>Segmented worm (class Hirundinea) up to five inches (12.7 centimeters) long with a flat body equipped with suction pads at each end. The mouth, located at the bottom of the front suction pad, has three teeth that the leech uses to pierce the skin of its host. The leech feeds on blood, and its glands secrete an anticoagulant to prevent the blood from clotting. The ordinary medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis) is abundant in springs and ponds from the Negev Desert to Galilee. It adheres to the bodies of human beings and animals that submerge themselves in water, injects its anticoagulant, and sucks their blood.<\/p>\n<p>The reference in Proverbs 30:15 is uncertain (see <span>nlt<\/span>) but may be to the parasitic and greedy nature of the horse leech (genus <em>Haemopis<\/em>). The small horse leech enters its host’s mouth and nostrils from water while the animal is drinking. A leech weighing one-half ounce (14.2 grams) has been known to gorge itself with two and a half ounces (71 grams) of concentrated blood and then to exist for 15 months with no more to eat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leopard\">Leopard<\/p>\n<p>Called <em>Panthera pardus tulliana,<\/em> it is the most widespread of all the large wildcats. In rocky areas it lives in caves, but in forested regions it lives in thick vegetation. In OT times many lived in the vicinity of Mt Hermon (Sg 4:8).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is somewhat smaller than the tiger, measuring up to 5 feet (1.5 meters) in length with a tail of about 30 inches (.8 meter). Its body is better proportioned than that of the tiger. The leopard takes its victim by surprise from a silent ambush, often concealing itself near villages or watering places and waiting for its prey, remaining in one spot for long spans of time. The leopard is swift on the ground (Hb 1:8), agile in trees, and very graceful in its movements. Its color is yellowish speckled with black spots (Jer 13:23). Daniel and John saw visions in which leopards were symbols of world powers (Dn 7:6; Rv 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is a wary and cunning animal, formidable and ferocious (Jer 5:6; Hos 13:7; cf. Is 11:6). The leopard is dangerous not only to domestic animals but also to humans. With its natural camouflage it can hide on the forest floor, blending into the changing light and shadows. The Israelites were terrified of the leopard because it constantly ravaged their sheep and goats. Several biblical place names suggest that they were known for the leopards in their vicinity: Nimrah, Beth-nimrah, and Nimrim, a district northeast of the Dead Sea. It has survived in the Holy Land into the present century; a few leopards still exist in remote areas near Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leviathan\">Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>Sea monster mentioned several times in the Bible (Pss 74:14; 104:26; Is 27:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). It may refer to any of the larger marine animals such as large jellyfish, whales, or sharks, or to a large reptile like the crocodile. Some scholars think “Leviathan” may refer to animals now extinct, such as ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs (marine reptiles similar to dinosaurs). The scriptural term might also refer to certain dinosaurs that spent part of their lives half-submerged in shallow lakes and oceans. Other scholars believe that most of the references are to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lion\">Lion<\/p>\n<p>Large, tawny-colored carnivore <em>(Panthera leo)<\/em> that preys chiefly on hoofed mammals and charges by a series of leaps and bounds. Within historic times the lion ranged in Africa, Europe, and the Holy Land. In ancient times the territories of the African and Persian lions met in the Middle East. The lion of the Holy Land was the Asiatic or Persian lion <em>(Panthera leo persica).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The males have heavy manes that stop at the shoulders but cover much of the chest. The Persian lion cannot climb and is mainly nocturnal, returning to its lair or a thicket by day (Jer 4:7; 25:38; Na 2:11-12). This lion is about 5 feet (1.5 meters) long with a tasseled tail 30 inches (.8 meter) or so long; its shoulders may reach a height of 35 inches (.9 meter). It is one of the smallest of the lion breeds.<\/p>\n<p>Lions are usually found in pairs, though sometimes in larger numbers. A small group is known as a pride. They generally prefer open country but in Palestine evidently prowled the subtropical vegetation of the Jordan River valley. Lions, which usually hunt at dusk, kill smaller animals by a blow of the paw, larger ones by a bite in the throat. A lion does not remain in the same place for more than a few days. The animal is in its prime at about seven years of age, when it weighs from 400 to 600 pounds (181.6 to 272.4 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>The lion does not characteristically attack humans, though like other great cats it may become a man-eater (1 Kgs 13:24-28; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25-26; Ps 57:4; Dn 6:7-27). Ordinarily, it attacks only out of great hunger or in self-defense. A very young lion that attacks humans can become dangerous if it develops a taste for human flesh. A very old lion, expelled from the pride because it can no longer keep up in the pursuit of antelope or gazelles, may choose humans as a relatively slow-moving prey.<\/p>\n<p>A lion generally roars only on a full stomach—that is, after it has consumed its prey (Ps 22:13; Ez 22:25; Am 3:4). Nevertheless, its roaring arouses fear (Am 3:8; 1 Pt 5:8). The lion is a bold (2 Sm 17:10; Prv 28:1), destructive animal (Ps 7:2; Jer 2:30; Hos 5:14; Mi 5:8), and the enemy of flocks (Am 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Lions were common in biblical times in all parts of the Holy Land. Hebrew has at least seven words for lion and young lion. The lion is referred to about 130 times in the OT—more than any other wild animal. Lions were evidently much less common in NT times. After gradually declining, they became extinct in Palestine shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 1300. The lion was present in Mesopotamia, however, until the end of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>Lions played an important part in the political and religious symbolism of the Near East (1 Kgs 10:19-20). In Assyria and Babylonia the lion was regarded as a royal beast (Dn 7:4). Oriental monarchs maintained artificial lion pits as places of execution (Ez 19:1-9; Dn 6:7-16). Animals for these were captured in camouflaged nets or pits. To the Jews, the lion was the mightiest of beasts (Prv 30:29-31). Thus, it symbolized leadership (Gn 49:9-10; Nm 24:9) and hence eventually became a title for Christ (Rv 5:5). It was also the ensign of Judah’s tribe and was used by King Solomon in the decoration of his house and the temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lizard\">Lizard<\/p>\n<p>Reptiles of the suborder Lacertilia. Their skin is covered with scales. The lizard is a useful creature because it captures harmful insects and worms. Like other reptiles, it lays eggs with shells softer than those of a bird and with no clear division between the yolk and the white. Lizards are “cold-blooded” organisms without a temperature-maintenance mechanism; hence, they become inactive in cold weather.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards can survive in barren parched countryside. In the Near East they are encountered in great numbers in the Arabian Desert, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Judean wilderness. There may be as many as 44 different species of lizards in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The Dabb lizard (genus <em>Uromastyx<\/em>), which attains a length of about 24 inches (61 centimeters), is found in the Negev Desert. It is omnivorous, an unusual trait since most lizards are insectivorous. It has a hard, rough skin, green with brown spots; a short, rounded head; and a powerful tail encircled with a row of strong spines that it uses as a weapon of defense.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards are listed as ceremonially unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:29-31). The fact that lizards crawl on their bellies made them unclean. Contact with a lizard’s carcass defiled a law-abiding Jew (Lv 11:32-36). The <span>nlt<\/span> translates the “lizards” of Leviticus 11 as “great lizard,” “gecko,” “monitor lizard,” “sand lizard,” and “chameleon.” The monitor lizard is a large lizard that lives in the deserts of southern Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt. It is up to 55 inches (1.4 meters) long with a long snout and sharp teeth. Other translators and commentators render the original Hebrew in a wide variety of ways, including “tortoise,” “ferret,” “lizard,” “snail,” “mole,” and even “water hen.” The fact that most of the original Hebrew words occur only once in Scripture makes it very difficult to be certain about their appropriate translation.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gecko (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Locust\">Locust<\/p>\n<p>An insect of the family <em>Acridiidae.<\/em> It is referred to by at least 12 different names in Scripture. The various Hebrew words may refer to different stages of its development from larva to adult or to the type of damage that it causes. Locusts are characterized by swarming and mass migration. In modern times they have caused extensive and disastrous destruction to vegetation. Grasshoppers do not swarm or migrate en masse, differentiating them from the true locusts.<\/p>\n<p>The OT mentions several different species of locusts. Leviticus 11:22 seems to refer to the slant-faced (bald) locust and also to the katydid, or long-horned grasshopper. The reference in Deuteronomy 28:42 may be to the mole cricket. In Joel 1:4 and 2:25 and in Nahum 3:16-17, successive stages of the insect’s development are described. The cutting locust (<span>kjv<\/span> “palmerworm”) of Joel is probably the first instar (stage of development), the swarming locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “locust”) are middle stages, and the hopping locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “cankerworm”) later instars but not yet fully matured insects. In the adult stage, called destroying locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “caterpillar”), the color of the locust is reddish brown, which turns to yellow with a brownish network on the wings.<\/p>\n<p>Only three of the hundreds of varieties of locusts found in Bible lands are capable of multiplying into great swarms, and only the desert locust <em>(Schistocerca gergaria)<\/em> can be considered widespread in all the Bible lands. The desert locust is native to the Sudan (Africa). It is a little over two inches (5 centimeters) long and has a wingspread of some five inches (12.7 centimeters). It shows two phases, a solitary phase and a gregarious phase, with a possible third phase known as transiens. There are differences in the immature and adult forms of the phases in color and physiology.<\/p>\n<p>The quantity and distribution of rains are important factors in the extent of swarming. Moist soil is needed for depositing the eggs and permitting them to develop. Each female deposits from one to six egg pods, containing 28 to 146 eggs each. The larvae emerge in 15 to 43 days.<\/p>\n<p>In the gregarious phase (from the second stage of metamorphosis onward), the locust is driven by a strong wandering instinct. Masses of them form a random procession of overflowing locust bodies that ignore any obstruction. They swarm over everything (Jl 2:4-9). The only regulator of their activities is temperature; they are immobilized by high or low temperatures. Taking to wing they may move 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) from their native home. They fly in compact formations large enough to blot out the light of the sun. Their movement seems to be controlled by hormones, but the direction is influenced by the wind. The swarms consume almost every plant in their path, sparing only the carob, sycamore, castor tree, and oleander bush.<\/p>\n<p>A locust plague was one of the most severe evils to come upon the ancient world (Dt 28:38). Joel 2:1-11 describes a locust plague in graphic terms, using it as a symbol of God’s destroying judgment. Special days of prayer, fasting, and trumpet blowing were prescribed to remove locust plagues (1 Kgs 8:37-38; 2 Chr 6:28-29; Jl 2:12-17). Locusts symbolized powerful and merciless enemies that completely destroyed the earnings of human toil (Jgs 6:5; Is 33:4; Jer 46:23; 51:27; Na 3:15).<\/p>\n<p>Bedouins eat locusts raw, roasted, or boiled, preserving them by drying and threading. They are also crushed and ground, and the grist used in cooking or eaten with bread, sometimes mixed with honey and dates. Such was the diet of John the Baptist (Mk 1:6). The Greeks ground locusts in stone mortars to make flour of them.<\/p>\n<p>The ancients considered the two large hind legs, or jumping legs, as separate limbs and had a special name for them. Hence locusts were described as having four legs, a reference to the four smaller walking legs. “Going on all fours” thus referred to creeping or walking as opposed to jumping and did not mean that the unclean insects had only four legs in all. Because of its two hind jumping legs, the locust was exempted from the prohibition against unclean insects (Lv 11:20-23).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mole\">Mole<\/p>\n<p>Rodent <em>(Spalax ehrenbergi)<\/em> from six to nine inches (15 to 23 centimeters) long, which burrows in any area where the soil is suitable for digging; it should be called a mole rat. Common in the Holy Land, large numbers are found in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:20 refers to the mole, as does Leviticus 11:29-30 (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The mole rat has no tail and is molelike in appearance, but neither true moles nor shrews have ever been found in the Holy Land. The mole rat’s teeth are strong and protruding like those of a squirrel. The neck is short and thick with a plump body shaped like a sausage. The short legs have broad paws with claws adapted for burrowing. The fur is soft, thick, and ashen gray. Its ears and almost sightless eyes, which are no larger than poppyseeds, are hidden in the fur. Folklore taught that touching a mole rat would result in blindness.<\/p>\n<p>In the wet winter season the mole rat builds breeding mounds resembling those of pocket gophers. It builds less complex resting mounds in the summer, although both have rather elaborate tunnel systems. The mole rat feeds on roots, bulbs, tubers, and various other subterranean plant parts, often doing extensive damage to agriculture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Moth\">Moth<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the genus <em>Tineola<\/em> that lays its eggs on wool or furs, its larvae feeding on those materials. The destructive qualities of moths are referred to in several biblical passages (Jb 13:28; Ps 39:11; Is 50:9; Hos 5:12; Mt 6:19-20; Lk 12:33; Jas 5:2). In Isaiah 51:8 “worm” (<span>nlt<\/span>) refers specifically to the larva of the clothes moth. The moth symbolizes disintegration, decay, and weakening. It is only the larvae that do the damage. The adult is quite harmless and feeds mainly on the nectar of flowers. It is easily crushed (Jb 4:19). The clothes moth reproduces in May or June. It enters human dwellings in the evening. A week after the eggs are laid the larvae appear and immediately begin their work of destruction, eating anything within reach made of animal fibers.<\/p>\n<p>The moth’s destructive activity is done in secret without any sound and without any dramatic appearance, such as a swarm that blots out the sun. In an age when wealth was counted more in possessions than in money, and when among those possessions wool clothing was highly valued, moths could literally cause economic disaster; hence the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>There are hundreds of species of moths other than the clothes moth in the Holy Land; they are harmless to leaves, flowers, fruit, trees, and seeds. As with the clothes moth, the larvae inflict the damage.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mouse\">Mouse<\/p>\n<p>Rodent of the family Muridae, especially genus <em>Mus.<\/em> The mouse was regarded as unclean because, being short legged, it was considered one of the creeping creatures (Lv 11:29). Mice known as commensals live in dwellings and tend to have longer tails and to be darker in color than wild mice, which are active chiefly at night. Mice are good climbers and even good swimmers. Wild mice eat many kinds of vegetation, including seeds, fleshy roots, leaves, and stems. At times they store food.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for “mouse” (Lv 11:29; 1 Sm 6:4-5; Is 66:17) is probably a general term for various rats and mice. The root meaning of the Hebrew word “mouse” is “destruction of corn,” a reference to the damage mice do to field crops. At least 23 varieties of mouselike rodents are known in the Holy Land. They cause food spoilage, damage household articles, and transport the host fleas that spread typhus, spotted fever, and bubonic plague. Plague bacteria may have caused the tumors or swellings among the Philistines (1 Sm 6:5). Isaiah 66:17 refers to a pre-exilic Canaanite cultic practice in which mice were eaten; the reference may actually be to the hamster. A number of rodents are eaten by Arabs of the Near East; the gerbil is considered a special delicacy. <em>See<\/em> Mole (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mule\">Mule<\/p>\n<p>Hybrid offspring of a male ass and a female horse <em>(Equus asinus mulus),<\/em> ordinarily sterile. The offspring of a female donkey and a stallion (male horse) is known as a hinny and is of little value because of its inferior size.<\/p>\n<p>Because crossbreeding was forbidden in the law (Lv 19:19), the Israelites procured mules from the Gentiles, perhaps from the Phoenicians, since Tyre (a Phoenician seaport in what is now southern Lebanon) imported horses and mules (Ez 27:14). Mules did not appear in Israel until David’s reign (2 Sm 13:29), possibly because of the rarity of horses among the Hebrews. Mules were used chiefly by members of the royal court and by other nobles. King David rode on a mule, and Solomon rode to his inaugaration on King David’s mule (1 Kgs 1:33). Absalom met his death riding on a mule (2 Sm 18:9). Mules were less common than horses, camels, and asses in the postexilic community (Ezr 2:66). In antiquity Asia Minor was especially noted for breeding fine mules.<\/p>\n<p>Mules have long enjoyed a reputation for obstinacy, but that trait is not mentioned in the Bible. The mule is prized for riding and for carrying heavy burdens, especially in warm mountainous regions. They are sure-footed and thrive best in hot, dry climates. The mule has the frugality, endurance, and steady gait of an ass along with the size, strength, swiftness, and courage of a horse. Mules are almost never sick. They live longer than horses. They can carry a load of up to 300 pounds (136 kilograms) as far as 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) a day.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Pig\">Pig<\/p>\n<p>Most properly, newborn swine. “Swine” is technically the better name for the species, but it is rarely used in common speech today. The domestic pigs of the Middle East derived from the wild pig <em>(Sus scrofa).<\/em> The pig is the most prolific and abundant supplier of meat and fat for food. A thick layer of fat just under the skin is especially pronounced in domestic breeds. Pigs cannot be driven, so they are of value only to the settled farmer. The Hebrews were originally a nomadic people; therefore, they had little use for an animal closely associated with settled life. An Egyptian prince of about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>, however, is recorded as owning a herd of 1,500 swine.<\/p>\n<p>The pig is clumsily built, yet lively and able to move with agility and speed. The most conspicuous characteristic of the pig is a truncated, mobile snout terminating in a disc-shaped surface on which the nostrils are located. Most pigs have large tusks in both jaws which grow continuously in life. The tusks of the upper jaw are unique in that they curve upward instead of pointing downward as in most animals. The excrement of a pig has an almost unbearable odor, which clings not only to the pig itself but also to swineherds, who can be identified a long way off.<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were never raised in the Holy Land by Jews. The great herd into which Jesus drove the unclean spirits was encountered in the land of the Gadarenes, a non-Jewish area east of the Jordan. The Gadarene demons took refuge in a herd of pigs feeding on a bluff overlooking the Sea of Galilee (Mt 8:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>Wild pigs were found in the Holy Land as in many countries today. Psalm 80:13 refers to the destructiveness of a wild boar (the male, or hog) attacking growing crops. A party of wild boars can destroy an entire vineyard or a field of crops in a single night. They devour, trample, and ravage everything within reach.<\/p>\n<p>Boar hunts were common in ancient Mesopotamia. Wild boars do not attack unless molested, but they are dangerous when aroused. They travel in bands of from 6 to 50 and are most active in the evening and early morning hours. The body is covered with stiff bristles and usually some finer hair, but the body covering is often quite scanty. Wild pigs are mainly vegetarian, feeding on roots, nuts, grains, and plant stems. Wild boars were particularly abundant in the mountainous regions of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, in the Jordan River valley, and in wooded sections such as Mt Tabor.<\/p>\n<p>Strict Jews would not even mention swine by name but would always substitute the term “the abomination.” Israelites considered themselves polluted if they were even touched by a swine’s bristle. To the Jews, the pig symbolized filth and ugliness. Pigs will eat fecal material, vermin, rodents, carrion, and the like (2 Pt 2:22). Proverbs 11:22 refers to the incongruity of a golden ring in the nose of an animal showing such characteristics. A similar metaphor occurs in Jesus’ statement about casting pearls before swine (Mt 7:6). The prodigal son’s degeneration was shown by his being forced in his poverty to feed pigs and eat their food (Lk 15:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Eating the flesh of pigs was forbidden to the Jews (Lv 11:7; Dt 14:8). The Canaanites in the Holy Land killed and ate pigs freely. In intertestamental times Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), a Syrian king whose territories included Israel, used the pig to “Hellenize” the Jews. He first tested their loyalty to the Jewish faith by requiring the consumption of pork, considered a delicacy by the Greeks (2 Macc 6:18). The act of desecration that drove the Jews to rebellion, however, was the sprinkling of pig blood on the temple altar in a sacrifice to Zeus (1 Macc 1:47).<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were frequently used in pagan worship (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17), which may account for their being forbidden to the Jews as food. Evidence in the Holy Land shows that pigs were sacrificed long before Hellenistic times. Pig bones were found in a grotto below the rock-cut place of sacrifice at Gezer. A similar underground chamber with vessels containing piglet bones at Tirzah dates to the middle Bronze Age (about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Alabaster fragments of a statuette of a pig ready to be sacrificed have been unearthed. Swine were sacrificed to Aphrodite (Venus) in Greece and Asia Minor. In addition, pigs were sacrificed in connection with oaths and treaties; in the <em>Iliad,<\/em> Agamemnon sacrificed a boar to Zeus and Helios. So it is not surprising that among the Jews the pig became a symbol of filthiness and paganism.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that eating pork was forbidden primarily because the pig may carry many worm parasites such as trichina, though that is also true of some “clean” animals. Another reason for forbidding their consumption may have been that pigs eat carrion. Some people are allergic to pork in hot weather—another suggested reason behind the Jewish taboo. The same taboo exists among the Muslims and existed in certain social strata in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Porcupine\">Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>Rodent, <em>Hystrix cristata,<\/em> which lives in forested areas, rocky hills, ravines, and valleys. The porcupine is still found in the Holy Land today. It has long quills that can be raised to give the appearance of a crest. It is almost entirely nocturnal. It burrows by day into a natural cavity or crevice. The Old World porcupine rarely climbed trees, although the New World porcupine frequently does. A porcupine may weigh as much as 60 pounds (27.2 kilograms). It eats fruit, bark, roots, and other vegetation, and carrion as well. Although its flesh is edible, the porcupine was not classed among the clean animals for the Israelites. The reference in Isaiah 34:11 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is probably to the porcupine, as is Isaiah 14:23 in the <span>nlt<\/span>. <em>See<\/em> Hedgehog.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Scorpion\">Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>Arthropod of the same group as spiders (arachnids). A dozen species of scorpions (order Scorpionida) are found in the Holy Land, but 90 percent of the scorpions are yellow scorpions, usually three to five inches (7.6 to 12.7 centimeters) long. The rock scorpion, also common to the Holy Land, is as thick as a man’s finger and from five to seven inches (12.7 to 17.8 centimeters) in length. Scorpions are slow, nocturnal invertebrates that rest beneath stones by day and prey on insects and other arachnids by night. At the end of its long tail the scorpion carries a poisonous sting that is fatal to most prey and extremely painful to humans (Rv 9:3, 5, 10; cf. 1 Kgs 12:11, 14). Scorpions symbolize Ezekiel’s evil countrymen (Ez 2:6) and the demonic forces of Satan (Lk 10:19). The scorpion is referred to as frequenting the Sinai Desert (Dt 8:15).<\/p>\n<p>A scorpion has from six to eight eyes. It has eight legs like a spider and two lobsterlike claws with which it catches and holds its prey. It feeds particularly on locusts and beetles. In many species the female scorpion eats the male after mating. Scorpions lay eggs that hatch very shortly after laying. Scorpions prefer warmer climates, and because of their desire for warmth, enter houses, especially at night, hiding in beds, blankets, footwear, and clothing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sheep\">Sheep<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animal, <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> referred to directly or by some term such as ewe, lamb, ram, or by some fact concerning them over 700 times in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Sheep represented the chief wealth and total livelihood of pastoral peoples, providing food to eat, milk to drink, wool for the making of cloth, and hides and bones for other uses. In addition, the sheep was a medium of exchange and a sacrificial animal. The number of sheep raised in ancient times was prodigious. Mesha, king of Moab, paid a tribute annually of 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams (2 Kgs 3:4). The Israelites took 250,000 sheep from the Hagrites (1 Chr 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>Sheep shearing was often done for festivals (2 Sm 13:23). The sheep was held down on its side and its legs were tied together; then it lay docilely while its wool was clipped (Is 53:7). Sheep reserved for burnt offerings were not shorn; nothing could be held back from a sacrifice to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Wool had to be processed before it could be used for clothing. First it was washed, sometimes while still on the sheep, then carded and perhaps weighed for the market. The spinning of wool was regarded as a woman’s work (Prv 31:19), but weaving the spun thread into cloth on a loom was primarily a man’s occupation.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible reports that Abel kept sheep (Gn 4:2). The first sheep to be domesticated was probably the argali <em>(Ovis ammon),<\/em> a variety of the urial <em>(Ovis vignei),<\/em> a mountainous species still existing in Turkestan and Mongolia. Five breeds had reached Mesopotamia by 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; all were of the urial stock.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep known in Israel was the broad-tailed sheep <em>(Ovis orientalis vignei<\/em> or <em>laticaudata),<\/em> of which the tail weighs from 10 to 15 pounds (4.5 to 6.8 kilograms) and has always been considered a delicacy. Thus the Lord asked for this choice part as a sacrifice (Ex 29:22-25).<\/p>\n<p>Only the ram of the broad-tailed sheep has horns, but in other varieties of sheep in the Holy Land the ewe also has horns. The horns, two to three inches (5 to 8 centimeters) in diameter, can be potent weapons. Rams’ horns could be used as trumpets (Jos 6:4) or as oil containers (1 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\n<p>Although the sheep is very similar to the goat, it is differentiated by a lower forehead, its angulated spiral horns marked with transverse wrinkles and curved slightly outward, its covering of wool, and its lack of a “goatee.” Most sheep are white (Ps 147:16; Is 1:18; Dn 7:9; Rv 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>The flesh of sheep was a luxury in the biblical culture. King Solomon required a daily provision of 100 sheep for his table (1 Kgs 4:23), but the common people ate lamb or mutton only on festive occasions. A young ram was usually chosen because the ewes were more important to the future prospects of the herd. The meat was boiled in large caldrons. The milk of the sheep is extremely rich; in biblical times it was usually allowed to curdle before drinking. Possibly some Israelites kept lambs in their houses as pets (2 Sm 12:3-4).<\/p>\n<p>To protect the flock at night against predatory attacks, the shepherd tried to provide a fold. In meadows near villages, folds were built and watchmen were hired to relieve the shepherds. The shepherds of the nativity story were out in the field (Lk 2:8); they had no fold but probably had set up a tent for shelter, consisting simply of goat-hair blankets spread across sapling supports. The scarcity of springs in the Holy Land made the watering of the flock a crucial problem for the shepherd (Gn 13:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>Wild mountain sheep, varieties of <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> are known in the Mediterranean area (Dt 14:5). The Deuteronomy passage (<span>kjv<\/span> “chamois”) might also refer to <em>Ovis traelaphus,<\/em> a sheep about five feet high (1.5 meters) with long, curved horns. Another possibility is the Barbary sheep that lives in small flocks in rugged mountain areas in Barbary, Egypt, and Mt Sinai. The true chamois is unknown in Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep is also used figuratively in Scripture. The ram represented great strength and fittingly symbolized Medo-Persia in Daniel’s vision (Dn 8:3). It is the nature of sheep to be gentle and submissive (Is 53:7; Jer 11:19), defenseless (Mi 5:8; Mt 10:16), and in constant need of guidance and care (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36). Such qualities are regarded as desirable in the lives of believers in Christ; hence the many figurative references to sheep in the NT and to Jesus as shepherd (Mk 6:34; Jn 10:1-30; Rom 8:35-37; Heb 13:20-21; 1 Pt 2:25). The resurrected Christ told the apostle Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snail\">Snail<\/p>\n<p>Invertebrate gastropods (mollusks). Land snails are very numerous in the Near East. Some freshwater forms serve as hosts for the schistosome worm, the fluke parasite causing the dread disease bilharzia (schistosomiasis).<\/p>\n<p>Purple dyes of all shades were highly valued in the ancient world. A royal purple dye was obtained from secretions of a sea snail <em>(Murex trunculus<\/em> and <em>Murex brandaris).<\/em> Evidently, that process was developed by Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Assyrians as early as 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The “purple” fishermen had their own guild during the time of the Roman Empire. The snails were harvested during the fall and winter seasons; in the spring, when egg laying took place, little dye was available. The snails tended to remain concealed in the summer. They inhabited the waters off Crete and Phoenicia. Tyrian purple, produced in the Phoenician city of Tyre, the center of the purple-dye industry, was obtained by a double dyeing. Large deposits of murex shells from dyeing operations have been found along the Mediterranean shoreline. The Israelites had to import purple goods (Ez 27:16). Lydia was a “seller of purple” or of cloth so dyed (Acts 16:14). Purple was a sign of distinction, royalty, and wealth (cf. Ex 25:4; 28:5-6, 15; Nm 15:38; 2 Chr 2:7; Est 8:15; Prv 31:22; Sg 3:10; Ez 27:7; Dn 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 30:34-35 refers to “onycha,” which was an important ingredient of incense. Onycha is the horny, clawlike operculum (the plate that closes off the opening of its shell when a snail is retracted) of a Near Eastern member of the molluskan family Strombidae. The operculum is sometimes used for offense or locomotion as well as for defense. When burned, the operculum gives off a sharp, strong scent, and when mixed with more fragrant but less powerful substances is even more potent. The name “onycha” is derived from a Greek word <em>(onyx)<\/em> for a fingernail or a claw.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snake\">Snake<\/p>\n<p>Various species of snake, suborder Ophidia (Serpentes). In the Bible nine Hebrew words and four Greek ones refer to snakes. The most common Hebrew word is onomatopoeic—that is, it is an imitation of a snake hissing or of the sound it produces as it scrapes its scales along the ground (cf. Jer 46:22). Many types of snakes lay eggs (Is 59:5), although some retain the eggs in the body until ready to hatch.<\/p>\n<p>Snakes are among the most widespread reptiles and are found on all continents except Antarctica; they decrease in numbers and species toward the poles but increase as one approaches the equator. Thirty-three species of snakes are known in Palestine and neighboring countries, 20 of which are poisonous. Two dangerous characteristics of the snake noted by biblical writers are its inconspicuous way of moving and the ease with which it hides itself.<\/p>\n<p>Many snakes are able to swallow animals several times their own diameter because of their unusually flexible jaw mechanism. They lack not only legs but also movable eyelids. Snakes periodically shed their skins. The tongue is actually a hearing apparatus sensitive to airborne vibrations and probably to heat waves.<\/p>\n<p>The venom of poisonous species is a clear, thin secretion, transmitted to the victim’s bloodstream by means of fangs. Two types of venom are known: that of the vipers, which affects respiration and disintegrates red blood cells, and that of the cobras, which paralyzes the nervous system.<\/p>\n<p>The “asp” referred to in the Bible is probably the cobra; the “adder” is the viper. The “cockatrice” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is probably the adder. Serpents were associated with worship in Canaanite religion and symbolized evil deities among many other peoples. Steles (upright stones bearing inscriptions) have been unearthed at several sites in the Holy Land and Syria depicting a god or worshiper with a snake winding about the legs or body. Because the Israelites were burning incense in pagan worship of Moses’ bronze serpent (Nm 21:8-9), King Hezekiah destroyed it in his religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Although snakes have been an object of veneration in some religions, in the Judeo-Christian tradition snakes represent evil and, more specifically, the devil. That association began in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:1-15) and is also found in the book of Revelation (12:9; 20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adder (above); Asp (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Spider\">Spider<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the order Araneida. Between 600 and 700 different species inhabit the Holy Land. Spiders are different from insects in that, like scorpions, they have four pairs of legs instead of three. Spiders are equipped with poison glands—the effectiveness varying from species to species. A few can kill only insects, but others can also kill birds and mice.<\/p>\n<p>Most spiders have a pair of spinnerets attached to silk glands on the underside of the abdomen; from them a web is extruded. In the Bible the spider’s web is referred to as a symbol of frailty and insecurity (Jb 8:14; Is 59:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sponge\">Sponge<\/p>\n<p>Simple marine animals, phylum Porifera. The term “sponge” also refers to those animals’ skeletal remains. The sponge has a porous body composed of tubules and cells.<\/p>\n<p>Sponge fishing was well known in the Mediterranean area in ancient times. It was practiced particularly along the Anatolian and Syrian coasts. Sponges were harvested by divers. The use of sponges in absorbing liquids is referred to in the Bible (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Unicorn\">Unicorn<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Wild Ox (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wasp\">Wasp<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the family Vespidae. Hornets are social wasps that build large aerial apartment houses in which 1,000 or more individuals may live. In the Bible the hornet is used as a metaphor for God’s use of military forces (Ex 23:28; Dt 7:20; Jos 24:12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Whale\">Whale<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all living creatures, including those that have become extinct. Whales are air-breathing mammals of the order Cetacea.<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of whales visit the shores of the Holy Land at times. The finback whale <em>(Balaenoptera physalus)<\/em> weighs about 200 tons (181 metric tons) and lives mainly in the Arctic region but sometimes passes through the Straits of Gibraltar to reach the eastern Mediterranean Sea. It feeds on small marine organisms that it strains through its whale bone; it does not have teeth. The finback whale’s esophagus is narrow.<\/p>\n<p>The sperm whale <em>(Physeter catodon),<\/em> about 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, has a curiously shaped head that looks like a battering ram. The teeth in the lower jaw of the male sperm whale are about seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long. It feeds on big fish, even on sharks. It has a large throat opening.<\/p>\n<p>Whales are referred to in Genesis 1:21 and Job 7:12 (<span>kjv<\/span> only). The “great fish” of Jonah 2:1 need not have been a whale but could have been a large shark, such as the whale shark <em>(Rhineodon),<\/em> which grows 70 feet (21.3 meters) long and lacks the terrible teeth of other sharks. Whatever the actual marine organism, Jonah’s deliverance was miraculous. The Greek word for “whale” is sometimes used as a general term for “sea monster” or huge fish and may be used in that sense in Matthew 12:40.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WildOx\">Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>Large, fierce, fleet, intractable animal <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> It had a long, lean rump with a straight back and a long, narrow head. The animal described in Job 39:9-12 is clearly the wild ox. The two horns (Dt 33:17), its outstanding characteristic, were straight and as long as the head (Nm 23:22; 24:8; Ps 22:21). Kings often symbolized their dominion by wearing a helmet with two wild ox horns (cf. Pss 92:10; 132:17-18). The horns were often used as drinking vessels by the Israelites; some were large enough to hold four gallons (15 liters).<\/p>\n<p>Hunting the wild ox was a favorite sport of Assyrian kings. Tiglath-pileser I hunted it in the Lebanon Mountains about 1100 <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Ps 29:6). At one time the animal referred to in Job 39:9-12 was thought to be the oryx or antelope because of the similarity between the Hebrew word in Job and the Arabian name for oryx. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> called the wild ox a “unicorn” because of representations found on Babylonian mosaics and Egyptian drawings. Those representations showed it in strict profile, showing only one horn—hence, “unicorn.” Jerome’s Vulgate, a Latin Bible translation (fourth century <span>AD<\/span>) and Martin Luther’s German version translated it similarly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wolf\">Wolf<\/p>\n<p>Large doglike mammal <em>(Canis lupus)<\/em> that travels in bands of up to 30 animals. From the nose to the rump, the wolf measures about 3 feet (.9 meter); its drooping tail is about 18 inches (.5 meter) long. It looks much like a skinny German shepherd dog. The grayish yellow pelt is coarse and short haired.<\/p>\n<p>Wolves hunt singly or in relays, usually at night (Jer 5:6). Wolves have acute hearing and sight but rely chiefly on scent and usually catch their prey in a swift, open chase. The wolf has a reputation for boldness, fierceness, and voracity (Gn 49:27; Hb 1:8). It commonly kills more than it can eat or drag away and thus is known for its greediness.<\/p>\n<p>The wolf is a restless animal, always on the move; hunger drives it from one place to another in constant search of new hunting grounds. During spring and fall, wolves usually roam singly or in pairs, whereas in summer they may travel in family groups. In winter, several such groups may join to form a large pack. Wolves are intelligent, social creatures, faithful to their own kind. They mate for life. Individually, the wolf is a rather timid animal; it would much rather avoid human beings. But collectively wolves can be among the most dangerous animals alive.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Rome, and Greece the wolf was considered sacred. Wolves were well known in the Holy Land and are still found there and also in many places in Asia Minor. Shepherds continually battled with wolves that plundered their flocks (Jn 10:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to wolves in a literal sense in only three places (Is 11:6; 65:25; Jn 10:12), all other references being figurative. Usually the wolf is a symbol of enemies or the wicked (e.g., Ez 22:27; Zep 3:3; Acts 20:29). Both the wolf’s courage and its cruelty were probably in the mind of the patriarch Jacob when he predicted the fate of Benjamin’s tribe (Gn 49:27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Worm\">Worm<\/p>\n<p>Actually insect larvae in most biblical references, usually maggots, the larvae of flies (see Fly, above). For example, maggots are evidently referred to in accounts of worms feeding on spoiled manna (Ex 16:19-20), corpses (Jb 21:26; Is 14:11), or open wounds (Jb 7:5). Mark 9:48 refers to a maggot that eats dead flesh. In Acts 12:23 a fatal, worm-induced abdominal disease of King Herod is mentioned. In other cases, the reference is to the larvae of other insects (Is 51:8). In Deuteronomy 28:39 and Jonah 4:7 the vine weevil <em>(Cochylis ambiguella)<\/em> is probably referred to; it destroys vines by boring into their stems. Comparing a man to a worm is a metaphor for abasement (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANIMALS<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals as object lessons.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical approach to classification of animals is somewhat different from the system of classification used by biologists today. The present system of classification, which traces back to Carolus Linnaeus (an 18th-century Swedish botanist), is based on structure, both internal and external. The biblical basis of classification is habitat. Thus Genesis 1 speaks of aquatic organisms (v 20); aerial organisms (v 21); animals that crawl on the ground (v 24); cattle or domesticated animals (animals that live in association with humans) (v 24); and wild animals (v 24). The same system of classification is followed in Leviticus 11 and throughout Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the divergence between systems of classification, the various animals of the Bible will be listed here in alphabetical order—including reptiles, fish, and even invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms, and sponges. Birds are discussed in a separate article.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Adder<\/p>\n<p>• Ant<\/p>\n<p>• Antelope<\/p>\n<p>• Ape<\/p>\n<p>• Asp<\/p>\n<p>• Ass<\/p>\n<p>• Badger<\/p>\n<p>• Bat<\/p>\n<p>• Bear<\/p>\n<p>• Bee<\/p>\n<p>• Behemoth<\/p>\n<p>• Camel<\/p>\n<p>• Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>• Cattle<\/p>\n<p>• Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>• Coral<\/p>\n<p>• Cricket<\/p>\n<p>• Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>• Deer<\/p>\n<p>• Dog<\/p>\n<p>• Donkey<\/p>\n<p>• Dragon<\/p>\n<p>• Fish<\/p>\n<p>• Flea<\/p>\n<p>• Fly<\/p>\n<p>• Fox<\/p>\n<p>• Frog<\/p>\n<p>• Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>• Gecko<\/p>\n<p>• Gnat<\/p>\n<p>• Goat<\/p>\n<p>• Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>• Hare<\/p>\n<p>• Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>• Horse<\/p>\n<p>• Hyena<\/p>\n<p>• Jackal<\/p>\n<p>• Leech<\/p>\n<p>• Leopard<\/p>\n<p>• Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>• Lion<\/p>\n<p>• Lizard<\/p>\n<p>• Locust<\/p>\n<p>• Mole<\/p>\n<p>• Moth<\/p>\n<p>• Mouse<\/p>\n<p>• Mule<\/p>\n<p>• Pig<\/p>\n<p>• Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>• Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>• Sheep<\/p>\n<p>• Snail<\/p>\n<p>• Snake<\/p>\n<p>• Spider<\/p>\n<p>• Sponge<\/p>\n<p>• Unicorn<\/p>\n<p>• Wasp<\/p>\n<p>• Whale<\/p>\n<p>• Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>• Wolf<\/p>\n<p>• Worm<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Adder\">Adder<\/p>\n<p>One of the 20 poisonous snakes found in Israel and surrounding countries, also referred to as cockatrice and viper. True vipers (genus <em>Cerastes, Echis colorata,<\/em> and <em>Vipera palestina<\/em>) also exist there, poisonous snakes with curved fangs that spring into position when the snake strikes. The horned viper <em>(Cerastes hasselquistii)<\/em> may attack horses. It is 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 centimeters) long and often lies in ambush in the sand with only its eyes and the hornlike protrusions on its head visible.<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and John the Baptist referred to the viper several times (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). The reference in Acts 28:3 is probably to a small viper <em>(Vipera aspis)<\/em> that strikes rapidly and is very pugnacious. It is found in southern Europe and hisses each time it inhales and exhales. The poison of vipers attacks the respiratory system and disintegrates red blood cells.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ant\">Ant<\/p>\n<p>Mentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in the book of Proverbs. For many years Solomon was charged with a biological error when he referred to the ant as providing her meat in the summer and gathering her food in the harvest (Prv 6:8). Critics of the Bible were quick to point out that, so far as was then known, ants do not store up food. They assumed that Solomon had probably kicked open an ant hill and mistaken the pupal cases (pods in which immature ants grow to maturity) for grain or had observed ants carrying bits of grain, leaves, and other matter to their nests.<\/p>\n<p>At least three species of grain-storing ants are now known—two occur in Israel and the other in Mediterranean countries. The particular species referred to by Solomon (Prv 6:6-8; 30:24-25) is probably the harvester ant <em>(Messor semirufus).<\/em> Its granaries are flat chambers connected by galleries irregularly scattered over an area about six feet (1.8 meters) in diameter and about a foot (.3 meter) deep in the ground. Seeds are collected from the ground or picked from plants. The head, or radicle, which is the softest part of the kernel, is bitten off to prevent germination, and the chaff and empty capsules are discarded on kitchen middens (refuse piles) outside the nest. Individual granaries may be 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) in diameter and a half inch (1.2 centimeters) high. Some nests are known to be 40 feet (12 meters) in diameter and 6 to 7 feet (approx. 2 meters) deep with several entrances.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Antelope\">Antelope<\/p>\n<p>Several antelope-like creatures are referred to in the Scriptures. One seems to be the white oryx <em>(Oryx leucoryx),<\/em> referred to in Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild ox”; <span>rsv<\/span> “antelope”) and Isaiah 51:20 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild bull”; <span>RSV <\/span>“antelope”). The oryx was probably the antelope, commonly used for food because its long horns made it relatively easy to catch.<\/p>\n<p>Another antelope mentioned in the Bible is the addax <em>(Addax nasomaculatus),<\/em> probably the “pygarg” of Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span>). It is a native of North Africa with grayish white hinder parts, a white patch on the forehead, and twisted and ringed horns. The word “pygarg” comes from a Greek word meaning “white rump.” The addax is about the size of a donkey. Its body is closely covered with short hair. It has a short mane on the underside of its neck that makes the head look somewhat like that of a goat. The hooves are broad and flat, and the tail resembles that of a donkey. It is common in Africa and in Arabia, where Arabs hunt it with falcons and dogs.<\/p>\n<p>Antelopes are very graceful and run with their heads held high. Both sexes have long, permanent, hollow horns. With the oryx the horns go straight back; addax horns are twisted and ringed. Antelope are alert, wary, and keen sighted. They are usually found in herds of from two to a dozen. If injured or brought to bay, an antelope attacks with its head lowered so that the sharp horns point forward. Antelopes feed on grasses and shrubs, drinking from streams and water holes. When water is scarce, they eat melons and succulent bulbs. Both addax and oryx were ceremonially clean in Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ape\">Ape<\/p>\n<p>Primate not native to Palestine. The two references to apes in the OT (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) refer to their importation by King Solomon with other treasures on board the ships of his mercantile fleet. There is some question concerning the origin of those primates. Some believe that the mention of “ivory” in the same verses suggests they came from East Africa and that they were indeed apes, that is, tailless primates. Others, believing they came from India or Ceylon, suggest that they were actually monkeys. There the baboon (genus Papeio), a large monkey, was considered sacred to the god Thoth. Males of that genus were kept in temples, and the more docile females were often kept as house pets. Such baboons frequently had some of their teeth removed or ground down to lessen the danger of their biting. A number of mummified baboons have been found in Egypt, indicating the high regard in which they were held.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Asp\">Asp<\/p>\n<p>Poisonous snake. Most biblical references to the asp (Dt 32:33) seem to be to the Egyptian cobra <em>(Naja haje),<\/em> which conceals itself in holes, walls, and rocks and has the ability to expand its neck by raising its anterior ribs so as to enlarge the front of its breast into the shape of a flat disc. Its potent poison can cause death in 30 minutes. It attains a length of about 80 inches (2 meters). The fangs are permanently erect, not movable as in the vipers (the common poisonous snakes of North America; only the coral snake in America has permanently erect fangs). Cobra poison attacks the nervous system, causing muscular paralysis. The Egyptians looked upon it as a sacred creature; they regarded it as a protector since it fed on the rodents that ate their crops. The “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:6; Dt 8:15, both <span>rsv<\/span>) may have been cobras; “fiery” probably refers to the burning fever caused by their venom. Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 (“flying serpent”) may refer to the hood of the cobra.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ass\">Ass<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Donkey (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Badger\">Badger<\/p>\n<p>Small hoofed mammal. What the <span>kjv<\/span> calls a “coney,” modern translations name “rock badger” (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7; Ps 104:18; Prv 30:26). The rock badger spoken of in the Bible is probably the Syrian rock hyrax <em>(Hyrax syriaca),<\/em> the only species of hyrax found outside Africa. This small ungulate (having hooflike toenails) lives among rocks from the Dead Sea valley to Mt Hermon. It is strictly a herbivorous (plant-eating) animal about the size of a rabbit. It resembles a guinea pig more than a rabbit, having quite inconspicuous ears and a very small tail. It has broad nails with four toes on its forelegs and three on its hind legs, the toes being connected with skin almost like a web. Pads acting as sucking discs under its feet enable it to keep its footing on slippery rocks. With its yellow and brown fur, it is sometimes called the bear rat because of its resemblance to a tailless rat. It is also equipped with black whiskers that may be seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>These rock badgers, or hyraxes, live together in colonies of from 6 to 50 animals, often sunning themselves on rocks. They are difficult to catch. Guards are posted, and if approaching danger is sighted, the whole group will scurry for cover, warned by the sharp whistles of the guards. Thus they are commended for taking refuge in the rocks (Ps 104:18) and are called wise for making “their houses in the rocks” (Prv 30:24, 26, <span>kjv<\/span>). The badger is not a ruminant (does not chew its cud), but the motion of its jaws may suggest that it chews its cud. That is probably why it was included with other cud-chewing animals in the Jewish food laws (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7). It was forbidden to the Jews as food because it did not have cloven hooves. Some Arabs eat and even prize its meat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bat\">Bat<\/p>\n<p>Flying mammals according to modern classification. They have hair and provide milk for their young. The Bible classifies them with other aerial creatures. Bats take shelter in caves, crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and also in exposed places on trees. In colder areas they hibernate or migrate. The normal resting position for a bat is hanging head downward. Bats “swim” through the air rather than fly because they move with their legs as well as with their wings.<\/p>\n<p>The bat’s thumb is free and terminates in a single hook claw used for climbing and hanging. The hind feet have five toes, all pointing the same way. The large chest accommodates the powerful muscles needed for flying. Because they orient themselves by echo location, the sense of hearing is very well developed.<\/p>\n<p>Most bats are insect eaters, seizing insects in flight. Many insectivorous bats also eat some fruit. Other bats feed exclusively, usually in groups, on fruit and green vegetation. Fruit-eating bats generally live in the tropics where fruit is constantly ripening, although some have been found in the Holy Land. These bats tend to be larger than the insectivores, having a wingspread of up to five feet (1.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>A third group includes flower-eating bats that feed on pollen and nectar. These small bats with long pointed heads and long tongues are found only in tropical and semitropical regions. Three species of vampire bats, which do not occur in the Holy Land, eat blood by making a small incision and lapping it up. Carnivorous (meat-eating) bats prey on birds, lizards, and frogs. Fish-eating bats catch fish at or near the water surface.<\/p>\n<p>Eight varieties of bats are known in the Holy Land. One of them, the little brown bat (genus <em>Myotis<\/em>), is worldwide in its distribution. It is insectivorous and probably has the widest distribution of any nonhuman terrestrial mammal. Brown bats are mostly cave dwellers. The females form maternity colonies that may number in the tens of thousands.<\/p>\n<p>Two species of mouse-tailed bats (genus <em>Rhinopoma<\/em>) are found in the Holy Land. Their tails are nearly as long as the head and body combined. They are colonial, roosting in caves, rock clefts, wells, pyramids, palaces, and houses. Like the brown bat, they are insectivorous. The slit-faced or hollow-faced bats (genus <em>Nycteris<\/em>) are also found in the Holy Land. They are insectivorous and roost in groups from 6 to 20.<\/p>\n<p>The bats found in the Holy Land vary in size from that of a mouse to the size of a rat; the largest species measures more than 20 inches (51 centimeters) across the wings. The bat was unclean to the Jews (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bear\">Bear<\/p>\n<p>Large, heavy, big-headed mammal with short, powerful limbs, a short tail, and small eyes and ears. Bears have a “plantigrade” walk: they walk on both the sole and heel as humans do. The Palestinian bear is a Syrian version of the brown bear <em>(Ursus arctos syriacus).<\/em> It can grow to a height of 6 feet (1.8 meters) and may weigh as much as 500 pounds (227 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>Bears have an excellent sense of smell but less developed senses of sight and hearing. They are omnivorous (eating any kind of food); they subsist largely on vegetation, fruits, insects, and fish.<\/p>\n<p>Bears are usually peaceful and inoffensive, but if they think they must defend themselves (Lam 3:10) or their young (2 Sm 17:8; Prv 17:12; Hos 13:8), they may be formidable and dangerous adversaries. David boasted of his role as a bear killer (1 Sm 17:34-37). Since a blow from a bear’s paw can be fatal, David’s courage and strength as a young shepherd in running after a bear and wrenching one of his father’s sheep from its jaws were noteworthy.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical passages seem to imply that bears attacked for no apparent reason (e.g., Prv 28:15; Am 5:19). At other times they were God’s instruments of punishment, as in the story of Elisha and the two she-bears (2 Kgs 2:24). The bear and the lion, often mentioned together in the Bible (1 Sm 17:37), were the two largest and strongest beasts of prey in the Holy Land. Thus they symbolized both strength and terror (Am 5:19).<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times bears seem to have roamed all over Palestine. Today they are found only in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains, and even there they are rare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bee\">Bee<\/p>\n<p>One of two domesticated insects <em>(Apis mellifica),<\/em> the other being the silkworm. Bees gather nectar from flowers, transferring pollen from one flower to another in the process. It is believed that they convey the location of sources of nectar to other bees through a bee “dance,” which may indicate both distance and direction. Bees are sensitive to four colors: blue-green, yellow-green, blue-violet, and ultra-violet (invisible to humans).<\/p>\n<p>The wild bees of the Holy Land are especially noted for their ferocity in attack. Only the female “worker” bees sting people and animals, the virulence of their venom increasing in warm weather. A number of biblical passages allude to the irritable, vindictive nature of bees and to the painful stings they inflict (Dt 1:44; Ps 118:12; Is 7:18).<\/p>\n<p>One reference calls attention to the fact that in semidesert regions a dead animal’s carcass, stripped to the bone by jackals or vultures and dried in the sun, can provide wild bees an excellent place to start a new colony (Jgs 14:5-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians considered the bee sacred. In ancient Greece candles were made from beeswax. In the Holy Land, beekeeping was probably not practiced until the Hellenistic period (second century <span>BC<\/span>), although Ezekiel 27:17 suggests that it may have been practiced earlier. If domestic honey was not available to the Hebrews, wild honey certainly was, and travelers would be on the lookout for caches of honey in rocky clefts and other likely places. The Philistines and the Hittites practiced beekeeping in their cities.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible contains many references to bees and bee products. A bee swarm was a valuable asset, though the price of honey itself was low. Honey was sometimes eaten with the honeycomb (Sg 5:1). Honey also had uses other than food, e.g., in embalming.<\/p>\n<p>The land of Israel was described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Honey was a major source of sweetening in the ancient Near East—hence, its importance (cf. Jgs 14:8-9). Actually the Hebrew word for “honey” may include not only bee honey but also the sweet syrup extracted from such fruits as figs, dates, and grapes. Thus “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex 3:8, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not necessarily stand for a land of bees but for a land rich in sweetness.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Honey.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Behemoth\">Behemoth<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Hippopotamus (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Camel\">Camel<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of burden. Unintelligent, ill-natured, and quarrelsome, the camel <em>(Camelus dromedarius)<\/em> is nevertheless a blessing to people living in the desert and on its borders because it is especially adapted to that habitat. It has been called the ship of the desert. Having thick elastic pads of fibrous tissue on its feet, it can walk on hot desert sands. It can go without water for long periods and can subsist on vegetation growing on the saline soils. The camel’s nostrils are pinched together and can be closed at will to prevent penetration of sand during violent sandstorms.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are used for transporting both goods and people. A person riding a camel can cover from 60 to 75 miles (96.5 to 121 kilometers) in a day. A camel can carry a load weighing 600 pounds (272 kilograms) or more. Camels were used heavily in the spice trade (Gn 37:25) and traveled regularly in camel trains between Arabia, Egypt, and Assyria. They were also ridden in time of war (Jgs 6:5). A camel can even be hitched to a plow in areas where the land is cultivated.<\/p>\n<p>The hair shed by camels during the early spring is preserved and used in weaving cloth and making tents. As much as 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) of hair can be obtained from one camel. A rough cloak of camel’s hair, as worn by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4), is still worn by Bedouins today. A camel’s hair garment was also the sign of the prophetic office (Zec 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of camel occur within the one-humped species, the slow burden-bearing camel referred to in Genesis 37:25 and the fast dromedary of 1 Samuel 30:17. The dromedary can stand seven feet (2.1 meters) tall and measure as much as nine feet (2.7 meters) from the muzzle to the tip of the tail. With its three-chambered stomach, which can hold from 15 to 30 quarts (14.2 to 28.4 liters) of liquid, it can go for as long as 5 days during the summer or 25 days in winter without drinking. The camel’s hump is a reserve store of fat, making it possible for the animal to subsist on very little food during a desert journey.<\/p>\n<p>Another species of camel, the Bactrian camel <em>(Camelus bactrianus),<\/em> is also resident in the Holy Land. It has two humps. It is heavier, bigger, and has longer hair than the one-humped camel and is slower than the swift dromedary. Isaiah 21:7 may refer to the Bactrian camel; both kinds of camel are referred to in Esther 8:10 (<span>kjv<\/span>). Camels ranked in importance with sheep, cattle, and asses in OT times. A third of the 66 biblical references to the camel lists it with other animals.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are ruminants (cud-chewing mammals) but do not have cloven hooves. Thus, they were included in the list of unclean beasts, forbidden by the Israelites as food (Lv 11:4; Dt 14:7). They are eaten by Arabs, however, who also drink their milk (cf. Gn 32:15).<\/p>\n<p>Abraham had camels in Egypt (Gn 12:16). At first Job had 3,000 camels (Jb 1:3) and after his recovery, 6,000 (Jb 42:12). Although wide use of camels does not seem to have begun until shortly before 1000 <span>BC<\/span> (Jgs 6:5), Sumerian texts from the Old Babylonian period list camels and indicate that they had been domesticated. Camel bones and figurines have been found at various eastern archaeological sites dating from well before 1200 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Caterpillar\">Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>Larval stage of insects characterized by complete metamorphosis. Such insects pass through four stages: egg, larva or caterpillar, pupa, and adult. Bees, flies, moths, and butterflies all pass through a larval or caterpillar stage.<\/p>\n<p>The word “caterpillar” occurs three times in the <span>nlt<\/span> (1 Kgs 8:37; 2 Chr 6:28; Ps 78:46). In the book of Joel that same Hebrew word is translated “locust” (1:4; 2:25, <span>nlt<\/span>). The locust and grasshopper to which the Hebrew word refers have an incomplete type of metamorphosis with only three stages: egg, nymph, and adult. The nymph is a miniature adult in which the wings are not fully developed, though their outline may be present. There are several nymph stages known as instars. The reference is to one of the last instars, in which the wing structures are still folded together and enclosed in a sac but are nevertheless clearly recognizable. That form of the insect is about an inch (2.5 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cattle\">Cattle<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animals of the bovine species <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> The OT often emphasized the beauty of cattle. Egypt was rich in cattle, especially in the Nile River delta area (Goshen), where the Hebrews settled under Joseph.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars believe that milk rather than meat was the foremost consideration in the domestication of cattle and that in early civilizations meat supplies came chiefly from wild game. Cattle also supplied strong hides that supplanted wood in the manufacture of shields. Their dung was a source of fuel when wood was scarce (Ez 4:15). They were used as beasts of burden and for plowing. Development of wheeled transportation was associated more closely with cattle than with any other animal.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical term “cattle” often refers to all domesticated animals or livestock (Gn 1:24; 2:20; 7:23; 47:6, 16-17; Ex 9:3-7; Nm 3:41, 45). Occasionally, the term was used to refer to all large domestic animals (Nm 31:9; 32:26), although sometimes the word as used in the <span>kjv<\/span> refers only to sheep and goats (Gn 30:32, 39, 43; 31:8, 10; Is 7:25; 43:23).<\/p>\n<p>Probably several kinds of cattle were domesticated in the Holy Land. Small, short-legged, black or brown shorthorn cattle were found in the southern part of Judah; that type submitted easily to the yoke and was prominent in agricultural operations. Along the coast a larger variety was found, and the wild districts east of the Jordan River were populated with a breed of huge black cattle.<\/p>\n<p>Cattle breeding was widely practiced by the patriarchs (cf. Gn 32:15; Jb 21:10). Strict laws in Mesopotamia, as well as in Israel, penalized the owner of a bull that gored a man or other cattle (Ex 21:28-36). Bulls were sometimes employed figuratively as pictures of strength or violence (Dt 33:17; Pss 22:12; 68:30; Is 10:13). For breeding purposes one bull is normally adequate for about 30 cows, but many more were kept since bulls were widely used in Israel for sacrifices. They might be used as a general sacrifice (Lv 22:23; Nm 23:1) or for special sacrifices (Jgs 6:25; 1 Sm 1:24). Particular sacrifices were offered at the consecration of priests (Ex 29:1), consecration of an altar (Nm 7), purification of the Levites (Nm 8), sin offerings (Lv 16), day of the new moon (Nm 28:11-14), Passover (Nm 28:19), Feast of Weeks (Nm 28:27), Feast of Trumpets (Nm 29:1-2), Day of Atonement (Nm 29:7-9), and the Feast of Tabernacles (Nm 29:12-38). The Feast of Tabernacles required the largest number of bulls for burnt offerings of all the annual feasts, with a total of 71 being slaughtered during the course of eight days.<\/p>\n<p>Calves were sometimes referred to as “sons of the herd” in the original Hebrew (Gn 18:8; 1 Sm 6:7; 14:32). The calf, a symbol of peacefulness (Is 11:6), was also used figuratively to refer to the weak (Ps 68:30). A calf’s head decorated the back of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:19). Calves were sometimes fattened in stalls to keep them from running off weight in the field (Am 6:4; Mal 4:2; Lk 15:23) or were kept around the house; the witch of Endor kept a calf in her house that she killed and served to Saul and his men (1 Sm 28:24-25). Calves supplied veal (Gn 18:7), considered a delicacy by the wealthy; Amos referred to stall-fattened calves in a denunciation of luxurious and careless living (Am 6:4). Calves also supplied meat for all Saul’s armies at the great slaughter of the Philistines (1 Sm 14:32). The “fatted calf” served roasted or boiled was gourmet fare, suitable for the finest banquet (Gn 18:7; Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Cattle were subject to the law of firstlings (Ex 13:12). They were a mark of wealth (Gn 13:2) and were considered proper booty of war (Jos 8:2). Aaron, the first high priest, made a golden calf as a rival to the ark of the covenant (Ex 32; Dt 9:16, 21). Even though he represented the calf as an image of the invisible God, it was especially offensive because the calf was a fertility symbol related to Egyptian and Canaanite practices. Two calves were later made by Jeroboam I of Israel (930–909 <span>BC<\/span>) for his shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28-33). Hosea’s prophetic denunciations of calf worship were directed at those shrines (Hos 8:5-6; 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>An ox is an adult castrated bull. A steer is a young ox. Oxen were used to do work (Nm 7:3; Dt 22:10; 25:4), though for moving heavy objects, cows were typically favored over bulls because of their more docile nature. Oxen were also used as pack animals (1 Chr 12:40, although they did not have the endurance of the ass, camel, or mule. They usually fed on grass (Nm 22:4; Ps 106:20), but they also ate straw (Is 11:7) and salted fodder (Is 30:24) and could be kept in a stable (Lk 13:15). Oxen could not be offered as sacrifices because they had been castrated (Lv 22:24). They could be used for food but were rarely eaten. Possession of an ox and an ass was regarded as the bare minimum for existence in the ancient Palestinian agriculture economy (Jb 24:3; cf. Ex 20:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Agriculture; Food and Food Preparation; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chameleon\">Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>Lizard characterized by its ability to change color according to its surroundings <em>(Chameleon vulgaris).<\/em> To the Israelites the chameleon was ritually unclean (Lv 11:30). The Hebrew word for chameleon is derived from a word meaning “to pant.” A lizard’s lungs are very large, and in ancient times lizards were believed to live on air. A chameleon’s eyes move independently of each other; so at times one eye may be turned upward and the other downward. Chameleons live in trees and bushes, clinging to branches with their long tails.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Coral\">Coral<\/p>\n<p>Calcareous (lime-containing) skeletons of relatively simple marine organisms <em>(Corallium rubrum).<\/em> Red coral from the Mediterranean and Red Seas is widely used for jewelry and for medicinal purposes. While the animal is alive, the coral is green in color and shrublike in appearance, looking rather like an underwater plant since the coral animals are immobil. When the coral is removed from the water, it becomes hard and red in color.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient times coral was sometimes used as money, along with precious stones, pearls, and gold. Some believe the biblical reference in Lamentations 4:7 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is to pearls rather than to coral, but it is probable that the references in Job 28:18 and Ezekiel 27:16 are to the red coral (see <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cricket\">Cricket<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the order Orthptera related to grasshoppers and locusts. According to Leviticus 11:22, the cricket was edible. The reference may be to one of the growth stages of the locust.<\/p>\n<p>The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word as “beetle.” Beetles are insects with chewing mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the fore pair being hard and sheathlike and the hind pair being membranous and folded under the fore pair. Some beetles are carnivorous, others are chiefly herbivorous. Some are aquatic, some produce a secretion that blisters the skin, some damage fabrics, some damage crops, and some feed on other insects that are harmful to humans. In ancient Egypt the beetle, or sacred scarab, was a symbol of the sun god Ra. Scarab seals and amulets were extremely popular in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Crocodile\">Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all existing reptiles <em>(Crocodilus vulgaris),<\/em> attaining a length of well over 20 feet (6 meters). Crocodiles are characterized by large lizardlike bodies supported by short legs. The head terminates in a flattened snout armed with strong conical teeth, each of which is implanted in a distinct socket. New teeth growing from beneath continually replace those in use. The toes are webbed. The back and tail are protected by quadrangular horny shields of varying sizes arranged in regular rows and in contact with one another at the edges. The eyes are covered with movable lids that can be closed when the animal enters the water.<\/p>\n<p>The crocodile spends most of its time in the water where it feeds mainly on fish but also on aquatic birds and even small animals that come down to the water’s edge to drink. It is surprisingly fast and agile on dry land, even though its legs are so short that its belly and tail drag across the earth leaving a distinct path.<\/p>\n<p>Until the beginning of the 20th century, the crocodile was found in the marshes and small coastal rivers of western Palestine. A first-century Roman writer, Pliny, referred to a place in the Holy Land called Crocodeilopolis (“crocodile city”) to the south of Mt Carmel, and visitors to the Holy Land as late as the 19th century reported seeing crocodiles in that general region.<\/p>\n<p>The description of “Leviathan” in Job 41 seems to be based on the crocodile (thus the translation of the <span>nlt<\/span>). The “dragon” of Ezekiel 29:3, used figuratively of the Egyptian pharaoh, may be a reference to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deer\">Deer<\/p>\n<p>Large ruminant (cud-chewing) animals. Only the males have antlers (branching horns). Deer antlers grow annually and are solid, in contrast to those of the antelope and the gazelle. Fully developed antlers are devoid of any covering of skin or horn and, for all practical purposes, may be regarded as a mass of dead bone carried for a certain time by the living animal.<\/p>\n<p>The end of the deer’s muzzle is naked in all species. The stomach is divided into a series of compartments, some of which are used to store partly chewed food. The food is later regurgitated, rechewed, and finally swallowed into a section of the stomach where true digestion takes place.<\/p>\n<p>Three species of deer were known in Palestine: the red deer <em>(Cervus elaphus),<\/em> the Persian fallow deer <em>(Dama mesopotamica),<\/em> and the roe deer <em>(Capreolus capreolus).<\/em> All are now extinct there. The last deer were hunted in the Holy Land in 1914. The red deer referred to in the Bible as “hart” (male), “stag” (male), or “hind” (female) stood about four feet (1.2 meters) high at the shoulder. It was gregarious (living in herds or flocks), each group remaining in a definite territory. Red deer grazed and browsed during the morning and late afternoon (Lam 1:6). The sexes remained in separate herds. The red deer was known for its leaping (Is 35:6) and sure-footedness in the mountains (Ps 18:33; Sg 2:8-9, 17; 8:14; Hb 3:19).<\/p>\n<p>The antlers of the Persian fallow deer (1 Kgs 4:23) were large, flattened, and palmated (shaped like an open palm with fingers extended), and its coat was a yellowbrown. It traveled in small groups, feeding mainly on grass in the morning and evening.<\/p>\n<p>The roe deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23) was a small, graceful animal, dark reddish brown in summer and yellowish gray in winter. Its antlers were about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and had three points. The roe deer preferred sparsely wooded valleys and the lower slopes of mountains, grazing in open grasslands. It usually associated in family groups made up of the doe and her offspring. They were shy, yet very curious. The roe deer barked like a dog when disturbed, and they were excellent swimmers.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the roe deer is actually referred to in such passages as 1 Kings 4:23; references may be to the fallow deer, although that animal does not seem to have lived in the southern part of Palestine around the Sinai Desert because of its need for ample amounts of food and water. Fallow deer were found in northern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The hart (the male red deer) was listed among the clean beasts that Jewish law permitted as food (Dt 12:15, 22; 14:5), but deer were not listed among the animals appropriate for sacrifice. The hind (female red deer) normally gave birth to one calf at a time, though twins were born with some degree of regularity (Jb 39:1; Ps 29:9, <span>kjv<\/span>; Jer 14:5). The gestation period was about 40 weeks. When it was about to give birth, the hind looked for a secure hiding place, preferably in the dense undergrowth of the forest where it could find natural protection for the tiny calf. During the first few days after birth, the mother never went far from her young. The fawn was able to stand on its own legs a few hours after birth. The solicitous care by the hind for her calf during the first days of its life is hinted at in a touching way in Jeremiah 14:4-5, where only a severe drought is said to drive the hind from her calf. Job 39:1-4 describes the calving of the hinds. The hind illustrated grace and charm (Gn 49:21; Prv 5:19), and its dark, gentle eyes and graceful limbs were used to describe the beauty of a woman (Prv 5:18-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dog\">Dog<\/p>\n<p>Probably the earliest domesticated animal <em>(Canis familiaris),<\/em> used very early in hunting. The modern dog is believed to have come from the Indian wolf <em>(Canis lupus pallipes).<\/em> The dogs of biblical times probably looked like a modern German shepherd, with short pointed ears, a pointed nose, and a long tail.<\/p>\n<p>The dog was generally looked down upon in biblical times (Prv 26:11; 2 Pt 2:22). The biblical writers did not share modern sentiments about dogs being man’s best friends. The dog was pictured as a scavenger, haunting streets and dumps (Ex 22:31; 1 Kgs 22:38; Mt 15:26; Lk 16:21). Human corpses could become the spoil of dogs (2 Kgs 9:35-36). In general, dogs served the same function as vultures and other birds of prey. Most of the 41 references in the Scriptures to dogs show strong disfavor. Dogs were considered cowardly, filthy creatures.<\/p>\n<p>Dogs used in hunting occur in paintings in Egyptian tombs, and there is a reference to dogs herding sheep in Job 30:1. One good quality of dogs highly esteemed by the Israelites was watchfulness (Is 56:10). In general, however, in biblical times “dog” was a term of contempt (1 Sm 17:43; 2 Sm 16:9) and was used of overly submissive persons (2 Sm 9:8; 2 Kgs 8:13) and of evil persons (Is 56:10-11; Mt 7:6; Phil 3:2; Rv 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>Dogs, like pigs, were voracious and omnivorous (eating any kind of food). In response to a Gentile woman’s request that he heal her daughter, Jesus used the metaphor of throwing household food scraps to dogs (Mt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30). At the time of Jesus, the word “dog” was a standard Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles who, like dogs, were considered unclean, although the diminutive form of the word, used by Jesus, softened this considerably. Seeing her faith, Jesus granted the woman’s request, giving a non-Jew some of “the children’s bread.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Donkey\">Donkey<\/p>\n<p>Beast of burden. The donkey of the Holy Land <em>(Equus asinus)<\/em> was quite different from the European donkey of today, which is usually a small, stubborn animal. In biblical times the donkey was a beautiful, stately, friendly animal. Its color was usually reddish brown. Three wild races have been described, all from Africa. The race from northwest Africa is extinct; the one from northeast Africa, if not extinct, is close to extinction; the Somalian race, which survives, did not play an important part in domestication. The northeast African race, the Nubian donkey, was evidently domesticated in the Nile River region in early historic times. The donkey was used as a mount from the time of domestication on. It is first mentioned in the Bible among the animals that Abraham acquired in Egypt (Gn 12:16). The donkey was primarily a beast of burden, driven but not bridled. From the time of the Middle Kingdom on (c. 2040 <span>BC<\/span>), it was used for riding in Egypt, but only the Jews and Nubians rode donkeys regularly. The donkey was also used for threshing grain and for pulling the plow. In Arab countries today peasants plow with a donkey and a cow or camel hitched together. In Israel the law forbade plowing with a donkey and an ox hitched together (Dt 22:10). Until the time of Solomon (960 <span>BC<\/span>), horses were not used in Palestine. From that time on, the horse was ridden by warriors; the donkey was used by those who were traveling peaceably.<\/p>\n<p>The donkey was held in high regard by the Jews and was considered an economic asset. An individual had to have a donkey for minimum existence (Jb 24:3), and wealth was frequently counted by the number of donkeys one possessed (Gn 12:16; 24:35). The donkey was considered an acceptable gift (Gn 32:13-15). It was allowed to rest on the Sabbath (Dt 5:14). Women in biblical times often used the donkey as a riding animal (Jos 15:18; 1 Sm 25:23; 2 Kgs 4:24); often a special driver would help a woman guide the animal, running along at its side. If a married couple possessed only one donkey, the husband usually walked alongside while the wife rode (Ex 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel returning from Babylon had ten times as many donkeys as horses and camels (Ezr 2:66-67; Neh 7:68-69). Job’s wealth was indicated by the fact that he had 500 she-donkeys before catastrophe hit him (Jb 1:3); after his recovery he had 1,000 donkeys (Jb 42:12). Joseph’s brothers used donkeys to transport the grain they purchased in Egypt (Gn 42:26; 43:24). Abigail transported food on donkeys to David and his troops during their conflict with Saul (1 Sm 25:18). David assigned one of the 12 managers of his royal estates to look after his donkeys exclusively (1 Chr 27:30).<\/p>\n<p>The onager, or Syrian wild donkey <em>(Equus hemionus hemihippus)<\/em>, is an intermediate between the true horse and the true donkey. Its ears are longer than those of a horse but shorter than those of a donkey. The front hooves are narrow; there are chestnuts (callouslike spots on the inside of the knees) on the front legs only, and the tail is short haired for a long distance from its root so that it appears to be tufted.<\/p>\n<p>The Sumerians (ancient Mesopotamians) were able to domesticate the onager, which was eventually replaced by the horse. It was used to draw chariots in Ur; a number of onagers were buried with their vehicles in a royal grave that dates from about 2500 <span>BC<\/span>. Later the wild onager was a favorite hunter’s prize for Babylonian and Assyrian kings.<\/p>\n<p>The onager was very common in the steppe lands near Israel, where it was described as a freedom-loving desert animal (Jb 24:5; 39:5-8; Ps 104:11; Is 32:14; Jer 2:24; Hos 8:9). Ishmael was described as “free and untamed as a wild donkey” (Gn 16:12, <span>nlt<\/span>)—that is, one who could not adjust to domestic life. Drought seems to have been responsible for the population decline of the onager in biblical times (Jer 14:6). The modern onager <em>(Equus hemionus onager)<\/em> is slightly larger than the Syrian wild donkey that is extinct.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dragon\">Dragon<\/p>\n<p>Any one of a number of monstrous land and sea creatures. In biblical usage, “dragon” does not refer to the huge, fire-breathing, winged reptile of European folklore. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> used the term to translate two Hebrew words that are usually rendered more precisely in modern translations. One word referred to desert animals; most scholars agree with the <span>niv<\/span> that “jackals” is its proper meaning (Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; Jer 9:11; Mal 1:3). <em>See<\/em> Jackal (below).<\/p>\n<p>The other Hebrew word translated “dragon” is harder to define. It was frequently used in reference to serpents (so translated in the <span>rsv<\/span>: Ex 7:9-12; Dt 32:33; Ps 91:13). In other <span>rsv<\/span> passages it is translated “sea monster” (Gn 1:21; Jb 7:12; Ps 148:7). The exact identity of such sea monsters is not known. Several <span>rsv<\/span> passages retain the English “dragon.” In two of them (Ps 74:13; Is 27:1), the context indicates that sea monsters are meant. In three others (Is 51:9; Ez 29:3; 32:2) “dragon” seems to refer to the crocodile, a figurative reference to the Egyptian pharaoh at the time of the exodus. Jeremiah 51:34 (translated “monster” in the <span>rsv<\/span>) may also refer to a voracious creature such as a crocodile. <em>See<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p>Babylonian myths described monsters and dragons in primordial conflict with the god Marduk; they represented the principle of evil. In its figurative usages in Scripture, “dragon” has a similar significance, especially in the prophetic books. In the book of Revelation it is a symbol of Satan, the archenemy of God and his people (Rv 12:3-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fish\">Fish<\/p>\n<p>Aquatic animals frequently mentioned in the Bible without names or descriptions that enable us to identify the particular species. Since time immemorial, fish have constituted one of the staple foods of humanity, and they still serve as the chief source of protein in many parts of the world. The trade in fish was highly developed in biblical times. For example, one of the gates in Jerusalem was called the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3; Zep 1:10). The law in Leviticus 11:9-12 permitted the Jews to eat fish, but only those having both fins and scales. Scaleless fish such as catfish were forbidden, even though they had fins.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian paintings depict various methods of fishing, and the Philistines fished in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the people of Israel were not a seafaring nation, it is safe to assume that most of their fish came from freshwater lakes and rivers, especially the Sea of Galilee. Some 36 species of fish have been identified in that lake, including varieties of perch, carp, barbel, “sardine,” and catfish.<\/p>\n<p>The method of fishing characteristic of NT times was the dragnet. After a boat had put out into the deep (Lk 5:4), a large net would be thrown out from it and then dragged toward shore by the rowers in the boat, possibly with the help of a crew in another boat. The catch was sorted out on shore (Mt 13:47-48). Fishing was usually carried out at night when the coolness of the water brought fish closer to the surface and when they could not see the approaching nets.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews also fished by hook and line (Mt 17:27), a few by spear (Jb 41:7), and some by the throw net (Ez 47:10). Habakkuk refers to hook-and-line fishing, netting, and seining (1:15).<\/p>\n<p>Very early in the history of the Christian church the fish became a symbol for Christ and the faith. It was scratched on the walls of Roman catacombs and may be seen today decorating walls, altars, pews, and vestments. The symbol came into use because the Greek word for “fish” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ichthus<\/span><em>)<\/em> is composed of the first letter of each word in the Greek phrase “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” <em>See<\/em> Whale (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Flea\">Flea<\/p>\n<p>Tiny, irritating insect (1 Sm 24:14; 26:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many species of fleas occur in Palestine, the most common being <em>Pulex irritans.<\/em> About a thousand species are known around the world. Fleas are wingless parasites that have sharp jaws and suck out blood from the bodies of humans and animals. The body is wedge shaped, enabling the flea to burrow into folds of skin and hide there. The eggs, laid by the female in dust heaps in the corners of rooms, hatch into small, white larvae that pupate (a nonfeeding stage) in a cocoon. Soon adult fleas appear that immediately attach themselves to the body of a host. The female requires blood for the development of her eggs.<\/p>\n<p>A flea bite is painful and causes some swelling and itching. Fleas are attracted by warmth. With favorable moisture and temperature, adult fleas can live a year or longer without food, but they are voracious feeders. The most dangerous fleas are those of the rat that transmit the organism responsible for bubonic plague. There were 41 recorded epidemics of bubonic plague before the Christian era.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fly\">Fly<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the order Diptera, which have one pair of wings. Many winged insects of other orders, however, are also called flies, such as the dragonfly or butterfly.<\/p>\n<p>As in almost all parts of the world, flies are abundant in Palestine. One of the most numerous is the common housefly <em>(Musca domestica),<\/em> found chiefly around dung heaps and garbage. The female lays her eggs, out of which emerge white maggots that feed on refuse. After a few days the maggot develops into a cocoon out of which emerges the adult housefly. In the summer the whole cycle lasts about 12 days, so that a fly can breed about 20 generations a year.<\/p>\n<p>Another fly common to Palestine is the botfly (family Oestridae). It causes much discomfort among livestock by irritating them and spreading diseases. Tabanid flies (family Tabanidae), including the horsefly (genus <em>Tabanus<\/em>) and related species, are also found in Palestine. Both the botfly and horsefly are known as gadflies because of the persistent distress they inflict. Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar is spoken of as a gadfly in view of his invasion of Egypt (Jer 46:20).<\/p>\n<p>The fourth plague in Egypt just before the exodus featured “swarms of flies” (Ex 8:21-31, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Pss 78:45; 105:31). Those swarms may have been made up of any or all the flies mentioned above. The maggots mentioned in Job 25:6 and Isaiah 14:11 and the worms in Exodus 16:24 and Job 7:5 and 17:14 were probably fly larvae.<\/p>\n<p>A proverb quoted in Ecclesiastes 10:1 probably refers to the housefly, which would be attracted to an open, perfumed ointment bottle. Once inside it would drown and eventually decay, causing the ointment to spoil and stink. The fly is also referred to in Isaiah 7:18 where it symbolizes Egypt. Isaiah may have had in mind a horsefly <em>(Tabanus arenivagus)<\/em> that attacks both humans and animals.<\/p>\n<p>Philistine inhabitants of the city of Ekron worshiped a god named Baal-zebul, meaning “Lord of the high places.” The Hebrews mockingly spoke of Baal-zebub, meaning “Lord of the flies” (2 Kgs 1:2). The NT form is Beelzebub (e.g., Mt 10:25; 12:24, 27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fox\">Fox<\/p>\n<p>Small, doglike carnivore with a bushy tail that is about half its body length. The red fox of the Holy Land <em>(Vulpes palaetinae)<\/em> is similar to the North American red fox; it is smaller than a wolf and is normally a nocturnal solitary animal. The omnivorous fox eats almost any kind of food—fruits, plants, mice, beetles, and birds—but seldom touches carrion. It loves the sweet juice of grapes, but it also burrows underground tunnels that can destroy the vines (Sg 2:15). The fox is intelligent and known for its slyness (Lk 13:32). It has considerable endurance and can run at speeds up to 30 miles (48 kilometers) per hour. The Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall were taunted by the wisecrack that even a fox jumping on their wall would knock it over (Neh 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptian fox <em>(Vulpes niloticus)<\/em> is found in the central and southern parts of the Holy Land. It is somewhat smaller than the common red fox. Its back is rust colored and its belly light. The Syrian fox <em>(Vulpes flavescens)<\/em> that lives in the northern part of the Holy Land is shiny gold in color.<\/p>\n<p>Some OT references such as Psalm 63:10 and Lamentations 5:18 are translated “fox” in the <span>kjv<\/span> but probably refer to jackals. Jackals, not foxes, hunt in packs and tend to act as scavengers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Frog\">Frog<\/p>\n<p>Amphibian (genus <em>Rana<\/em>), living part of its life in the water and part on land.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs and toads are covered with soft, hairless skin and lack a tail in the adult stage. The hind legs are much longer and more powerfully developed than the forelegs so that the animals are able to jump large distances. It has been suggested that the frog referred to in Scripture is an edible one, <em>Rana ridibunda,<\/em> one of the aquatic frogs found in Egypt and in the stagnant waters of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The female frog lays her eggs in the water; after about a week the eggs hatch into tadpoles. Gradually through metamorphosis the tail is lost and limbs are acquired. Frogs must maintain a moist skin since they take oxygen through the skin as well as through their lungs; thus they must always remain close to water. They feed on insects and worms.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs are found throughout the Palestinian lowlands, where their croaking is heard in the spring and on summer evenings. The Israelites seem to have associated frogs primarily with sliminess and foulness. They fell into the category of creeping or swarming creatures, which in general were ritually unclean (Lv 11:29-31). Since the frog was not specifically listed, however, rabbis did not consider it one of the animals that defiled human beings through contact.<\/p>\n<p>In Revelation 16:13 certain foul spirits are said to look like frogs. The ancient Egyptians made the frog a symbol of life and birth and an image of Heqet, the patron goddess of birth. She is depicted with a frog’s head giving life to the newborn. Thus that deity was discredited when the power of God afflicted Egypt in the second of the ten plagues on the Egyptians with the very animal that was her symbol (Ex 8:1-14; Pss 78:45; 105:30). The frog in question may have been the spotted frog of Egypt <em>(Rana punctata,<\/em> or <em>Rana ridibunda).<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gazelle\">Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>Small, dainty, graceful antelope with hollow recurved horns on both sexes. Two varieties exist in the Holy Land, the dorcas gazelle <em>(Gazella dorcas),<\/em> which is pale fawn in color and up to 22 inches (56 centimeters) tall, and the Arabian gazelle <em>(Gazella arabica),<\/em> which is a dark smoky color and up to 25 inches (63.5 centimeters) tall.<\/p>\n<p>Gazelles are still quite common throughout the desert and steppe areas of the Holy Land, especially in the Negev Desert. Herds usually consist of from 5 to 10 animals, but some varieties assemble in large migratory herds in the fall to relocate to lower elevations and new feeding grounds. Gazelles are herbivorous (plant eating). They are very shy and post guards to warn the herd of approaching danger.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times the gazelle was probably the game animal most hunted by the Jews (Prv 6:5; Is 13:14). Pharaoh Tutankhamen hunted gazelles and ostriches. The gazelle is said to have graced Solomon’s table (1 Kgs 4:23). Gazelles were not easy to catch because of their great speed (2 Sm 2:18; 1 Chr 12:8; Prv 6:5); they surpass the deer in swiftness. They were trapped in various ways—encircled with nets, driven into enclosures with pitfalls, or forced into narrow valleys and shot with arrows. The Bedouin hunt gazelle with falcons and dogs; the falcon annoys the gazelle, striking it on the head and injuring it so that the dogs can overtake it.<\/p>\n<p>The gazelle is referred to in Song of Songs 2:9, 17; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14, where it is an image of feminine beauty.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gecko\">Gecko<\/p>\n<p>Reptile of the family Gekkonidae, referred to in Leviticus 11:30. In Jewish food law it was a ritually unclean lizard. There are seven species of geckos in the Holy Land (including <em>Hemidactylus turcicus<\/em> and <em>Ptyodactylus hasselquistii,<\/em> all insectivorous—insect eating). The gecko makes a low mourning sound by vibrating its tongue rapidly against the roof of its mouth. In legend the gecko was said to cause leprosy by crawling across a person’s body.<\/p>\n<p>Another name for the gecko is the wall lizard, so named because it can walk upside down on ceilings with the aid of the suction discs on its toes—but it often plops down into the middle of the home. Since it was considered unclean, such an intrusion would have been a disgusting nuisance to Jewish households (Lv 11:31-38).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gnat\">Gnat<\/p>\n<p>Any very small fly, in common and biblical usage. According to the <span>nlt<\/span>, the third plague in Egypt before the exodus consisted of gnats (Ex 8:16-18; Ps 105:31). The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word there as “lice,” but the breeding pattern described in Exodus 8—insects rising from the dust—seems to fit gnats better than lice. Since “gnat” is a general term, the small flies of that plague may have included several small species such as mosquitos, harvester gnats, midges, or sand flies.<\/p>\n<p>The sand fly inflicts a far more painful bite than the mosquito. Further, it does not betray itself by a buzzing noise in flight and is so small that it penetrates most mosquito netting.<\/p>\n<p>Gnats were drawn to wine while it was fermenting. The Pharisees in particular would strain their wine to avoid consuming unclean insects (Mt 23:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Goat\">Goat<\/p>\n<p>Cloven-hooved mammals (genus <em>Capra<\/em>) with large eyes and big, floppy ears that constantly twitch. Both males and females have backward arching horns. The Palestinian goat is a ruminant (cud-chewing animal) of lighter build than the sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was probably the earliest ruminant to be domesticated. Its wild ancestor seems to have been the Gezoar goat <em>(Capra aegagrus).<\/em> Wild goats are believed to have been domesticated very early in Palestine. The goat of Bible times was probably the Syrian or Mamber variety <em>(Capra hircus mambrica).<\/em> Domesticated goats may have as many as four kids in a litter, whereas wild goats bear only one or two.<\/p>\n<p>The Palestinian goat was commonly black. Speckled and spotted goats were a rarity, and for that reason Jacob’s request for those goats in Genesis 30:32 appeared very modest. There may also have been red goats (cf. 1 Sm 16:12; 19:13, where goat’s hair was used to imitate David’s hair, which was “ruddy” or auburn).<\/p>\n<p>Almost every part of the goat was used by the Israelites. The whole goat was used for sacrifice. Its flesh served as meat (Lv 7:23; Dt 14:4), and it was the principal source of milk (Prv 27:27). Goats were sheared in the late spring, and the goat hair was used for weaving tent cloth and for various domestic purposes (Ex 36:14; 1 Sm 19:13, 16). The tabernacle at Mt Sinai was made of goat’s hair blankets (Ex 26:7).<\/p>\n<p>Adult male goats were generally not eaten because of their strong flavor and toughness and also because they were necessary to insure the flock’s increase. Young kids, however, were usually the chief meat for a feast and were offered to visitors as a symbol of hospitality. Goat milk is richer than the milk of cows and sheep and evidently had broader uses. A good goat gives three quarts of milk a day, from which a rich butter and buttermilk can be made. The average Hebrew family could have lived almost entirely on a single goat’s production.<\/p>\n<p>Goatskin was tanned as leather, and the whole hide was turned into a skin bottle by sewing shut leg and neck apertures (Gn 21:14; Jos 9:4). Goatskin had many uses, including the construction of Hebrew musical instruments. The nebal, a large harp, was made with goatskin for its base sound. Drums had goatskin coverings.<\/p>\n<p>Goats were herded with sheep in biblical times, but each group remained separate following its own bell-laden leader. Jesus was evidently referring to their common herding in his description of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Because of their wool, sheep are valued more than goats. However, where pasture and water are scarce and thorny shrubs dominate over grass, sheep are difficult to keep and goats become important. They can live under conditions that suit neither cows nor sheep, producing large quantities of milk. The goat does not supply fat as the sheep does, and since its hair is coarse its wool is rather scarce. Goat-hair cloth called cilicium was used to make tents.<\/p>\n<p>Goats have voracious appetites. They also were responsible for much damage done to the land of Palestine, breaking down terraces, destroying forests, and bringing about soil erosion by eating off all cover.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was recognized as a form of wealth, subject to the law of firstlings (Nm 18:17). It had to be eight days old before it could be offered as a sacrifice. A year-old male goat was one of the animals offered at the Passover (28:22), and two goats were offered on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:7-10). The goat was also used for other specific sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>The ibex, a type of wild goat <em>(Capra ibex nubiana),<\/em> still lives in small numbers on the cliffs close to the Dead Sea. That it was known in ancient times is evident from rock carvings. It is distinguished from the true wild goat by having a more compact rump and horns that are slender and curved back. Its slender legs and sharp cloven hooves enable it to cling to narrow rock ledges, to jump between them, and to climb steep cliffs.<\/p>\n<p>Usually the ibex is found in rugged mountain country among rocky crags and meadows just below the snow line (Ps 104:18). In Job 39:1 they are referred to as “mountain goats.” They frequently gather in herds of 5 to 20. They graze and browse, being active in the afternoon and sometimes feeding through the night. The large horn of the ibex was at one period made into the shofar that was blown in the second Jerusalem temple to announce the new year and the jubilee year.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was often used in a figurative and symbolic sense by the writers of the Bible: in Song of Songs 4:1 and 6:5 for the bride’s black hair; in Matthew 25:31-46 for the wicked; and in Ezekiel 34:17 and Daniel 8:5-8 for various human leaders.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Grasshopper\">Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>Large insects of the Orthoptera order. They have chewing or biting mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the front pair of which is narrow and somewhat thickened and the hind pair membranous and used for flying. When not in use the flight wings are folded beneath the protective front wings like a fan against the body. By rubbing their wings together, male grasshoppers produce sounds that both males and females can detect. Grasshoppers pass through a partial metamorphosis; the egg hatches into a juvenile nymph that looks like an adult except for its smaller size and undeveloped wings. After several months the nymph becomes a winged adult.<\/p>\n<p>The terms “grasshopper” and “locust” are often used interchangeably. Actually the locust is a kind of grasshopper. Also confusing is the fact that other insects such as cicadas are sometimes called locusts. The difference between grasshoppers and locusts depends more on behavior than appearance. Grasshoppers are individual insects that lead solitary lives and do not migrate. The same insects when migrating in a swarm are called migratory grasshoppers or locusts. Elimination of their food supply by drought, flood, or fire may lead to migration. Climatic factors such as a warm dry winter also stimulate migrations.<\/p>\n<p>Grasshoppers and locusts have been a staple food in the Middle East and also among the Indians of the American Southwest. To the Israelites the grasshopper was considered ritually clean and could be eaten (Lv 11:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hare\">Hare<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the genus and species <em>Lepus europaeus judaeus, Lepus capensis,<\/em> and <em>Lepus arabicus.<\/em> It is found in open country, often near or on cultivated lands, and in woods, usually deciduous rather than evergreen. It is an herbivorous rodent and is different from the rabbit, which is not found in Palestine. Although it is not a true ruminant according to modern classification (because it does not have a four-chambered stomach), the hare does rechew its food. It has a process of partial regurgitation of material too hard for the cells in the stomach to absorb initially; thus, the hare actually chews food previously swallowed.<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern hares have very long ears and large hind feet; their feet are well furred. They are similar to American jackrabbits, which are true hares. Hares do not dig or occupy burrows the way rabbits do. Hares are mainly nocturnal and spend their inactive hours hiding in vegetation. They eat grasses and herbaceous matter as well as twigs and young bark of woody plants. Hares breed with great rapidity—the young attaining sexual maturity at six months after birth.<\/p>\n<p>The hare was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:6; Dt 14:7), evidently because although it appeared to chew its cud, it did not have cloven hooves. Consumption of hares has also been forbidden among the Arabs, Chinese, and Lapps, but the hare was widely hunted by other people in ancient and modern times. Its great speed, prolific breeding, timidity, and caution have saved it from extermination by its many enemies.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hippopotamus\">Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of problematic interpretation. Some early interpreters thought it referred to the elephant, others to the wild ox, the mammoth, or any large animal. It was called “behemoth” by the <span>kjv<\/span> translators. Today it is generally agreed that the reference is to the hippopotamus <em>(Hippopotamus amphibius),<\/em> a large, thick-skinned, amphibious mammal, an ungulate (having hooflike toenails) with a large head, a bulky, hairless body, and short legs.<\/p>\n<p>The description in Job 40:15-24 fits closely the modern hippopotamus (see <span>nlt<\/span>), except for the depiction of the tail. At present the hippopotamus is found only in the rivers of Africa, but there is fossil evidence that it has existed in the Holy Land, perhaps in the swamps of northern Galilee and the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\n<p>The hippopotamus has highly developed sense organs, placed in such a way that it can see, hear, and smell almost without being seen; its eyes, ears, and nostrils can reach above water while the rest of the animal lies submerged. It has a large mouth, large tusks, and a short, heavy throat. The strong legs are so short that the belly almost reaches the ground when the animal is on the land. The hippopotamus lives on plants and herbs growing in rivers, but if food is scarce there, it forages on land, usually at night. In spite of its heavy body it is surprisingly agile on land.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Horse\">Horse<\/p>\n<p>Przewalski’s horse (<em>Equus przewalskii,<\/em> an eastern race that roamed about Mongolia until modern firearms destroyed most of them after World War I) and the tarpan (a western race of southern Russia that became extinct in the Ukraine in 1851). The domesticated horse <em>(Equus caballus)<\/em> seems to have been derived from the tarpan. The original site of domestication is believed to have been Turkestan, a region north of Afghanistan and India, now in Russia. The horse differs from the donkey in that it has shorter ears, a longer mane with a forelock, a long hairy tail, and a soft, sensitive muzzle.<\/p>\n<p>Horses were used in war not only for riding but also for pulling the heavy, springless war chariots. Two kinds of horses were needed for these different purposes, and the Hebrews distinguished between chariot horses and cavalry horses.<\/p>\n\n<p>The Lord warned the early Israelites against unnecessarily amassing military strength in the form of horses and thereby following the oppressive tactics of the powerful Egyptians (Dt 17:14-16), but the demands of war caused both David and Solomon to import horses from Egypt into their kingdoms and to breed them. Solomon greatly increased the number of horses in the Jewish kingdom and maintained large stables at various cities (1 Kgs 10:26) such as the regional defense centers of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15-19). Ahab’s horses are mentioned in 1 Kings 18:5, and records of Shalmaneser III state that Ahab furnished 2,000 chariots to a coalition against Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>In early Israel, the horse was opposed as a symbol of pagan luxury and of dependence on physical power for defense (Dt 17:16; 1 Sm 8:11; Ps 20:7; Is 31:1). Horse trading, mentioned as early as Genesis 47:17, was carried on by Solomon between Egypt and the Syro-Hittite principalities (1 Kgs 10:28-29). Most biblical references to horses refer to their use in war, but horses were also used for transportation. Riding seems to have been less popular than the use of chariots. Cavalry units were not introduced until the 12th century <span>BC<\/span> by the Medes. Joseph rode in Pharaoh’s second horse-drawn chariot (Gn 41:43), and Absalom made a display by riding a horse-drawn chariot (2 Sm 15:1). Naaman traveled by horse and chariot (2 Kgs 5:9). Later, horses were so common in Jerusalem that the royal palace had a special horse gate (2 Chr 23:15), and a gate of the city itself was known as the Horse Gate (Neh 3:28; Jer 31:40). Mordecai rode a royal horse of King Xerxes as a sign of honor (Est 6:8-11). Horses are often spoken of figuratively (Ps 32:9; “mare,” Sg 1:9; “stallions,” Jer 5:8; 12:5), especially in the context of judgment (Hb 3:8; Zec 1:8; 6:1-8; Rv 6:2-8; 9:17; 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Warfare; Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hyena\">Hyena<\/p>\n<p>Stocky carnivore <em>(Hyaena hyaena)<\/em> with coarse hair, an erect mane, and long hairs along the neck and back. Hyenas live in holes among rocks and banks. They are mainly nocturnal but are ordinarily neither noisy nor aggressive. Their cry, however, is a disagreeable, unearthly sound. Hyenas usually feed on carrion, crushing bones with their powerful jaws. If the carrion supply is inadequate, they will kill sheep, goats, or other small animals. When threatened, hyenas growl and erect their mane, but they rarely fight. They are massively built with forelegs longer than the hind legs.<\/p>\n<p>Known as scavengers in Africa, hyenas eat domestic refuse in the villages. In Palestine the striped hyena is a common predator, preferring rocky territory and even rock tombs. Since hyenas were notorious for raiding the graves of the dead, all Israelites who could afford it arranged for burial in tombs protected by massive stone doors. Absalom, King David’s son who was killed by Joab in the wild, was buried under a huge pile of stones to protect his corpse from molestation by hyenas (2 Sm 18:17).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Jackal\">Jackal<\/p>\n<p>Carnivore <em>(Canis aureus)<\/em> smaller than the true wolf and with a shorter tail. It is similar to the fox but has a broader head, shorter ears, and longer legs. The fox is solitary; the jackal tends to be gregarious. Its tail can be drooping or erect, compared with the long horizontal tail of the fox. Jackals usually prowl at night, either singly, in pairs, or in packs through open savannah country. They eat small mammals, poultry, fruit, vegetables, and carrion. They spend their days in thickets and clumps of vegetation. Often they obtain scraps from kills by larger carnivores. Jackals can run at speeds of about 33 miles (53 kilometers) per hour.<\/p>\n<p>The jackal can reach a height of about 20 inches (51 centimeters), roughly the size of a German shepherd dog. Its back is pale yellow with dark, almost black, flanks. Its lips are black and its ears white on the inside. The howl of the jackal sounds like the crying of a child or the heartrending wail of the bereaved (Mi 1:8; cf. Jb 30:29). To other jackals the howl is merely an invitation calling the pack together for its nocturnal hunting.<\/p>\n<p>OT references are chiefly to jackals prowling around ruined cities and wilderness areas (Neh 2:13; Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; Jer 9:11; 14:6; 49:33; 51:37; Lam 4:3; 5:18; Mal 1:3). Many such references are translated “dragon” in the <span>kjv<\/span>, but “jackal” is more appropriate.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leech\">Leech<\/p>\n<p>Segmented worm (class Hirundinea) up to five inches (12.7 centimeters) long with a flat body equipped with suction pads at each end. The mouth, located at the bottom of the front suction pad, has three teeth that the leech uses to pierce the skin of its host. The leech feeds on blood, and its glands secrete an anticoagulant to prevent the blood from clotting. The ordinary medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis) is abundant in springs and ponds from the Negev Desert to Galilee. It adheres to the bodies of human beings and animals that submerge themselves in water, injects its anticoagulant, and sucks their blood.<\/p>\n<p>The reference in Proverbs 30:15 is uncertain (see <span>nlt<\/span>) but may be to the parasitic and greedy nature of the horse leech (genus <em>Haemopis<\/em>). The small horse leech enters its host’s mouth and nostrils from water while the animal is drinking. A leech weighing one-half ounce (14.2 grams) has been known to gorge itself with two and a half ounces (71 grams) of concentrated blood and then to exist for 15 months with no more to eat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leopard\">Leopard<\/p>\n<p>Called <em>Panthera pardus tulliana,<\/em> it is the most widespread of all the large wildcats. In rocky areas it lives in caves, but in forested regions it lives in thick vegetation. In OT times many lived in the vicinity of Mt Hermon (Sg 4:8).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is somewhat smaller than the tiger, measuring up to 5 feet (1.5 meters) in length with a tail of about 30 inches (.8 meter). Its body is better proportioned than that of the tiger. The leopard takes its victim by surprise from a silent ambush, often concealing itself near villages or watering places and waiting for its prey, remaining in one spot for long spans of time. The leopard is swift on the ground (Hb 1:8), agile in trees, and very graceful in its movements. Its color is yellowish speckled with black spots (Jer 13:23). Daniel and John saw visions in which leopards were symbols of world powers (Dn 7:6; Rv 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is a wary and cunning animal, formidable and ferocious (Jer 5:6; Hos 13:7; cf. Is 11:6). The leopard is dangerous not only to domestic animals but also to humans. With its natural camouflage it can hide on the forest floor, blending into the changing light and shadows. The Israelites were terrified of the leopard because it constantly ravaged their sheep and goats. Several biblical place names suggest that they were known for the leopards in their vicinity: Nimrah, Beth-nimrah, and Nimrim, a district northeast of the Dead Sea. It has survived in the Holy Land into the present century; a few leopards still exist in remote areas near Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leviathan\">Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>Sea monster mentioned several times in the Bible (Pss 74:14; 104:26; Is 27:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). It may refer to any of the larger marine animals such as large jellyfish, whales, or sharks, or to a large reptile like the crocodile. Some scholars think “Leviathan” may refer to animals now extinct, such as ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs (marine reptiles similar to dinosaurs). The scriptural term might also refer to certain dinosaurs that spent part of their lives half-submerged in shallow lakes and oceans. Other scholars believe that most of the references are to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lion\">Lion<\/p>\n<p>Large, tawny-colored carnivore <em>(Panthera leo)<\/em> that preys chiefly on hoofed mammals and charges by a series of leaps and bounds. Within historic times the lion ranged in Africa, Europe, and the Holy Land. In ancient times the territories of the African and Persian lions met in the Middle East. The lion of the Holy Land was the Asiatic or Persian lion <em>(Panthera leo persica).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The males have heavy manes that stop at the shoulders but cover much of the chest. The Persian lion cannot climb and is mainly nocturnal, returning to its lair or a thicket by day (Jer 4:7; 25:38; Na 2:11-12). This lion is about 5 feet (1.5 meters) long with a tasseled tail 30 inches (.8 meter) or so long; its shoulders may reach a height of 35 inches (.9 meter). It is one of the smallest of the lion breeds.<\/p>\n<p>Lions are usually found in pairs, though sometimes in larger numbers. A small group is known as a pride. They generally prefer open country but in Palestine evidently prowled the subtropical vegetation of the Jordan River valley. Lions, which usually hunt at dusk, kill smaller animals by a blow of the paw, larger ones by a bite in the throat. A lion does not remain in the same place for more than a few days. The animal is in its prime at about seven years of age, when it weighs from 400 to 600 pounds (181.6 to 272.4 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>The lion does not characteristically attack humans, though like other great cats it may become a man-eater (1 Kgs 13:24-28; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25-26; Ps 57:4; Dn 6:7-27). Ordinarily, it attacks only out of great hunger or in self-defense. A very young lion that attacks humans can become dangerous if it develops a taste for human flesh. A very old lion, expelled from the pride because it can no longer keep up in the pursuit of antelope or gazelles, may choose humans as a relatively slow-moving prey.<\/p>\n<p>A lion generally roars only on a full stomach—that is, after it has consumed its prey (Ps 22:13; Ez 22:25; Am 3:4). Nevertheless, its roaring arouses fear (Am 3:8; 1 Pt 5:8). The lion is a bold (2 Sm 17:10; Prv 28:1), destructive animal (Ps 7:2; Jer 2:30; Hos 5:14; Mi 5:8), and the enemy of flocks (Am 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Lions were common in biblical times in all parts of the Holy Land. Hebrew has at least seven words for lion and young lion. The lion is referred to about 130 times in the OT—more than any other wild animal. Lions were evidently much less common in NT times. After gradually declining, they became extinct in Palestine shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 1300. The lion was present in Mesopotamia, however, until the end of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>Lions played an important part in the political and religious symbolism of the Near East (1 Kgs 10:19-20). In Assyria and Babylonia the lion was regarded as a royal beast (Dn 7:4). Oriental monarchs maintained artificial lion pits as places of execution (Ez 19:1-9; Dn 6:7-16). Animals for these were captured in camouflaged nets or pits. To the Jews, the lion was the mightiest of beasts (Prv 30:29-31). Thus, it symbolized leadership (Gn 49:9-10; Nm 24:9) and hence eventually became a title for Christ (Rv 5:5). It was also the ensign of Judah’s tribe and was used by King Solomon in the decoration of his house and the temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lizard\">Lizard<\/p>\n<p>Reptiles of the suborder Lacertilia. Their skin is covered with scales. The lizard is a useful creature because it captures harmful insects and worms. Like other reptiles, it lays eggs with shells softer than those of a bird and with no clear division between the yolk and the white. Lizards are “cold-blooded” organisms without a temperature-maintenance mechanism; hence, they become inactive in cold weather.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards can survive in barren parched countryside. In the Near East they are encountered in great numbers in the Arabian Desert, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Judean wilderness. There may be as many as 44 different species of lizards in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The Dabb lizard (genus <em>Uromastyx<\/em>), which attains a length of about 24 inches (61 centimeters), is found in the Negev Desert. It is omnivorous, an unusual trait since most lizards are insectivorous. It has a hard, rough skin, green with brown spots; a short, rounded head; and a powerful tail encircled with a row of strong spines that it uses as a weapon of defense.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards are listed as ceremonially unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:29-31). The fact that lizards crawl on their bellies made them unclean. Contact with a lizard’s carcass defiled a law-abiding Jew (Lv 11:32-36). The <span>nlt<\/span> translates the “lizards” of Leviticus 11 as “great lizard,” “gecko,” “monitor lizard,” “sand lizard,” and “chameleon.” The monitor lizard is a large lizard that lives in the deserts of southern Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt. It is up to 55 inches (1.4 meters) long with a long snout and sharp teeth. Other translators and commentators render the original Hebrew in a wide variety of ways, including “tortoise,” “ferret,” “lizard,” “snail,” “mole,” and even “water hen.” The fact that most of the original Hebrew words occur only once in Scripture makes it very difficult to be certain about their appropriate translation.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gecko (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Locust\">Locust<\/p>\n<p>An insect of the family <em>Acridiidae.<\/em> It is referred to by at least 12 different names in Scripture. The various Hebrew words may refer to different stages of its development from larva to adult or to the type of damage that it causes. Locusts are characterized by swarming and mass migration. In modern times they have caused extensive and disastrous destruction to vegetation. Grasshoppers do not swarm or migrate en masse, differentiating them from the true locusts.<\/p>\n<p>The OT mentions several different species of locusts. Leviticus 11:22 seems to refer to the slant-faced (bald) locust and also to the katydid, or long-horned grasshopper. The reference in Deuteronomy 28:42 may be to the mole cricket. In Joel 1:4 and 2:25 and in Nahum 3:16-17, successive stages of the insect’s development are described. The cutting locust (<span>kjv<\/span> “palmerworm”) of Joel is probably the first instar (stage of development), the swarming locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “locust”) are middle stages, and the hopping locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “cankerworm”) later instars but not yet fully matured insects. In the adult stage, called destroying locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “caterpillar”), the color of the locust is reddish brown, which turns to yellow with a brownish network on the wings.<\/p>\n<p>Only three of the hundreds of varieties of locusts found in Bible lands are capable of multiplying into great swarms, and only the desert locust <em>(Schistocerca gergaria)<\/em> can be considered widespread in all the Bible lands. The desert locust is native to the Sudan (Africa). It is a little over two inches (5 centimeters) long and has a wingspread of some five inches (12.7 centimeters). It shows two phases, a solitary phase and a gregarious phase, with a possible third phase known as transiens. There are differences in the immature and adult forms of the phases in color and physiology.<\/p>\n<p>The quantity and distribution of rains are important factors in the extent of swarming. Moist soil is needed for depositing the eggs and permitting them to develop. Each female deposits from one to six egg pods, containing 28 to 146 eggs each. The larvae emerge in 15 to 43 days.<\/p>\n<p>In the gregarious phase (from the second stage of metamorphosis onward), the locust is driven by a strong wandering instinct. Masses of them form a random procession of overflowing locust bodies that ignore any obstruction. They swarm over everything (Jl 2:4-9). The only regulator of their activities is temperature; they are immobilized by high or low temperatures. Taking to wing they may move 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) from their native home. They fly in compact formations large enough to blot out the light of the sun. Their movement seems to be controlled by hormones, but the direction is influenced by the wind. The swarms consume almost every plant in their path, sparing only the carob, sycamore, castor tree, and oleander bush.<\/p>\n<p>A locust plague was one of the most severe evils to come upon the ancient world (Dt 28:38). Joel 2:1-11 describes a locust plague in graphic terms, using it as a symbol of God’s destroying judgment. Special days of prayer, fasting, and trumpet blowing were prescribed to remove locust plagues (1 Kgs 8:37-38; 2 Chr 6:28-29; Jl 2:12-17). Locusts symbolized powerful and merciless enemies that completely destroyed the earnings of human toil (Jgs 6:5; Is 33:4; Jer 46:23; 51:27; Na 3:15).<\/p>\n<p>Bedouins eat locusts raw, roasted, or boiled, preserving them by drying and threading. They are also crushed and ground, and the grist used in cooking or eaten with bread, sometimes mixed with honey and dates. Such was the diet of John the Baptist (Mk 1:6). The Greeks ground locusts in stone mortars to make flour of them.<\/p>\n<p>The ancients considered the two large hind legs, or jumping legs, as separate limbs and had a special name for them. Hence locusts were described as having four legs, a reference to the four smaller walking legs. “Going on all fours” thus referred to creeping or walking as opposed to jumping and did not mean that the unclean insects had only four legs in all. Because of its two hind jumping legs, the locust was exempted from the prohibition against unclean insects (Lv 11:20-23).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mole\">Mole<\/p>\n<p>Rodent <em>(Spalax ehrenbergi)<\/em> from six to nine inches (15 to 23 centimeters) long, which burrows in any area where the soil is suitable for digging; it should be called a mole rat. Common in the Holy Land, large numbers are found in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:20 refers to the mole, as does Leviticus 11:29-30 (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The mole rat has no tail and is molelike in appearance, but neither true moles nor shrews have ever been found in the Holy Land. The mole rat’s teeth are strong and protruding like those of a squirrel. The neck is short and thick with a plump body shaped like a sausage. The short legs have broad paws with claws adapted for burrowing. The fur is soft, thick, and ashen gray. Its ears and almost sightless eyes, which are no larger than poppyseeds, are hidden in the fur. Folklore taught that touching a mole rat would result in blindness.<\/p>\n<p>In the wet winter season the mole rat builds breeding mounds resembling those of pocket gophers. It builds less complex resting mounds in the summer, although both have rather elaborate tunnel systems. The mole rat feeds on roots, bulbs, tubers, and various other subterranean plant parts, often doing extensive damage to agriculture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Moth\">Moth<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the genus <em>Tineola<\/em> that lays its eggs on wool or furs, its larvae feeding on those materials. The destructive qualities of moths are referred to in several biblical passages (Jb 13:28; Ps 39:11; Is 50:9; Hos 5:12; Mt 6:19-20; Lk 12:33; Jas 5:2). In Isaiah 51:8 “worm” (<span>nlt<\/span>) refers specifically to the larva of the clothes moth. The moth symbolizes disintegration, decay, and weakening. It is only the larvae that do the damage. The adult is quite harmless and feeds mainly on the nectar of flowers. It is easily crushed (Jb 4:19). The clothes moth reproduces in May or June. It enters human dwellings in the evening. A week after the eggs are laid the larvae appear and immediately begin their work of destruction, eating anything within reach made of animal fibers.<\/p>\n<p>The moth’s destructive activity is done in secret without any sound and without any dramatic appearance, such as a swarm that blots out the sun. In an age when wealth was counted more in possessions than in money, and when among those possessions wool clothing was highly valued, moths could literally cause economic disaster; hence the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>There are hundreds of species of moths other than the clothes moth in the Holy Land; they are harmless to leaves, flowers, fruit, trees, and seeds. As with the clothes moth, the larvae inflict the damage.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mouse\">Mouse<\/p>\n<p>Rodent of the family Muridae, especially genus <em>Mus.<\/em> The mouse was regarded as unclean because, being short legged, it was considered one of the creeping creatures (Lv 11:29). Mice known as commensals live in dwellings and tend to have longer tails and to be darker in color than wild mice, which are active chiefly at night. Mice are good climbers and even good swimmers. Wild mice eat many kinds of vegetation, including seeds, fleshy roots, leaves, and stems. At times they store food.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for “mouse” (Lv 11:29; 1 Sm 6:4-5; Is 66:17) is probably a general term for various rats and mice. The root meaning of the Hebrew word “mouse” is “destruction of corn,” a reference to the damage mice do to field crops. At least 23 varieties of mouselike rodents are known in the Holy Land. They cause food spoilage, damage household articles, and transport the host fleas that spread typhus, spotted fever, and bubonic plague. Plague bacteria may have caused the tumors or swellings among the Philistines (1 Sm 6:5). Isaiah 66:17 refers to a pre-exilic Canaanite cultic practice in which mice were eaten; the reference may actually be to the hamster. A number of rodents are eaten by Arabs of the Near East; the gerbil is considered a special delicacy. <em>See<\/em> Mole (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mule\">Mule<\/p>\n<p>Hybrid offspring of a male ass and a female horse <em>(Equus asinus mulus),<\/em> ordinarily sterile. The offspring of a female donkey and a stallion (male horse) is known as a hinny and is of little value because of its inferior size.<\/p>\n<p>Because crossbreeding was forbidden in the law (Lv 19:19), the Israelites procured mules from the Gentiles, perhaps from the Phoenicians, since Tyre (a Phoenician seaport in what is now southern Lebanon) imported horses and mules (Ez 27:14). Mules did not appear in Israel until David’s reign (2 Sm 13:29), possibly because of the rarity of horses among the Hebrews. Mules were used chiefly by members of the royal court and by other nobles. King David rode on a mule, and Solomon rode to his inaugaration on King David’s mule (1 Kgs 1:33). Absalom met his death riding on a mule (2 Sm 18:9). Mules were less common than horses, camels, and asses in the postexilic community (Ezr 2:66). In antiquity Asia Minor was especially noted for breeding fine mules.<\/p>\n<p>Mules have long enjoyed a reputation for obstinacy, but that trait is not mentioned in the Bible. The mule is prized for riding and for carrying heavy burdens, especially in warm mountainous regions. They are sure-footed and thrive best in hot, dry climates. The mule has the frugality, endurance, and steady gait of an ass along with the size, strength, swiftness, and courage of a horse. Mules are almost never sick. They live longer than horses. They can carry a load of up to 300 pounds (136 kilograms) as far as 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) a day.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Pig\">Pig<\/p>\n<p>Most properly, newborn swine. “Swine” is technically the better name for the species, but it is rarely used in common speech today. The domestic pigs of the Middle East derived from the wild pig <em>(Sus scrofa).<\/em> The pig is the most prolific and abundant supplier of meat and fat for food. A thick layer of fat just under the skin is especially pronounced in domestic breeds. Pigs cannot be driven, so they are of value only to the settled farmer. The Hebrews were originally a nomadic people; therefore, they had little use for an animal closely associated with settled life. An Egyptian prince of about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>, however, is recorded as owning a herd of 1,500 swine.<\/p>\n<p>The pig is clumsily built, yet lively and able to move with agility and speed. The most conspicuous characteristic of the pig is a truncated, mobile snout terminating in a disc-shaped surface on which the nostrils are located. Most pigs have large tusks in both jaws which grow continuously in life. The tusks of the upper jaw are unique in that they curve upward instead of pointing downward as in most animals. The excrement of a pig has an almost unbearable odor, which clings not only to the pig itself but also to swineherds, who can be identified a long way off.<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were never raised in the Holy Land by Jews. The great herd into which Jesus drove the unclean spirits was encountered in the land of the Gadarenes, a non-Jewish area east of the Jordan. The Gadarene demons took refuge in a herd of pigs feeding on a bluff overlooking the Sea of Galilee (Mt 8:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>Wild pigs were found in the Holy Land as in many countries today. Psalm 80:13 refers to the destructiveness of a wild boar (the male, or hog) attacking growing crops. A party of wild boars can destroy an entire vineyard or a field of crops in a single night. They devour, trample, and ravage everything within reach.<\/p>\n<p>Boar hunts were common in ancient Mesopotamia. Wild boars do not attack unless molested, but they are dangerous when aroused. They travel in bands of from 6 to 50 and are most active in the evening and early morning hours. The body is covered with stiff bristles and usually some finer hair, but the body covering is often quite scanty. Wild pigs are mainly vegetarian, feeding on roots, nuts, grains, and plant stems. Wild boars were particularly abundant in the mountainous regions of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, in the Jordan River valley, and in wooded sections such as Mt Tabor.<\/p>\n<p>Strict Jews would not even mention swine by name but would always substitute the term “the abomination.” Israelites considered themselves polluted if they were even touched by a swine’s bristle. To the Jews, the pig symbolized filth and ugliness. Pigs will eat fecal material, vermin, rodents, carrion, and the like (2 Pt 2:22). Proverbs 11:22 refers to the incongruity of a golden ring in the nose of an animal showing such characteristics. A similar metaphor occurs in Jesus’ statement about casting pearls before swine (Mt 7:6). The prodigal son’s degeneration was shown by his being forced in his poverty to feed pigs and eat their food (Lk 15:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Eating the flesh of pigs was forbidden to the Jews (Lv 11:7; Dt 14:8). The Canaanites in the Holy Land killed and ate pigs freely. In intertestamental times Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), a Syrian king whose territories included Israel, used the pig to “Hellenize” the Jews. He first tested their loyalty to the Jewish faith by requiring the consumption of pork, considered a delicacy by the Greeks (2 Macc 6:18). The act of desecration that drove the Jews to rebellion, however, was the sprinkling of pig blood on the temple altar in a sacrifice to Zeus (1 Macc 1:47).<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were frequently used in pagan worship (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17), which may account for their being forbidden to the Jews as food. Evidence in the Holy Land shows that pigs were sacrificed long before Hellenistic times. Pig bones were found in a grotto below the rock-cut place of sacrifice at Gezer. A similar underground chamber with vessels containing piglet bones at Tirzah dates to the middle Bronze Age (about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Alabaster fragments of a statuette of a pig ready to be sacrificed have been unearthed. Swine were sacrificed to Aphrodite (Venus) in Greece and Asia Minor. In addition, pigs were sacrificed in connection with oaths and treaties; in the <em>Iliad,<\/em> Agamemnon sacrificed a boar to Zeus and Helios. So it is not surprising that among the Jews the pig became a symbol of filthiness and paganism.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that eating pork was forbidden primarily because the pig may carry many worm parasites such as trichina, though that is also true of some “clean” animals. Another reason for forbidding their consumption may have been that pigs eat carrion. Some people are allergic to pork in hot weather—another suggested reason behind the Jewish taboo. The same taboo exists among the Muslims and existed in certain social strata in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Porcupine\">Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>Rodent, <em>Hystrix cristata,<\/em> which lives in forested areas, rocky hills, ravines, and valleys. The porcupine is still found in the Holy Land today. It has long quills that can be raised to give the appearance of a crest. It is almost entirely nocturnal. It burrows by day into a natural cavity or crevice. The Old World porcupine rarely climbed trees, although the New World porcupine frequently does. A porcupine may weigh as much as 60 pounds (27.2 kilograms). It eats fruit, bark, roots, and other vegetation, and carrion as well. Although its flesh is edible, the porcupine was not classed among the clean animals for the Israelites. The reference in Isaiah 34:11 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is probably to the porcupine, as is Isaiah 14:23 in the <span>nlt<\/span>. <em>See<\/em> Hedgehog.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Scorpion\">Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>Arthropod of the same group as spiders (arachnids). A dozen species of scorpions (order Scorpionida) are found in the Holy Land, but 90 percent of the scorpions are yellow scorpions, usually three to five inches (7.6 to 12.7 centimeters) long. The rock scorpion, also common to the Holy Land, is as thick as a man’s finger and from five to seven inches (12.7 to 17.8 centimeters) in length. Scorpions are slow, nocturnal invertebrates that rest beneath stones by day and prey on insects and other arachnids by night. At the end of its long tail the scorpion carries a poisonous sting that is fatal to most prey and extremely painful to humans (Rv 9:3, 5, 10; cf. 1 Kgs 12:11, 14). Scorpions symbolize Ezekiel’s evil countrymen (Ez 2:6) and the demonic forces of Satan (Lk 10:19). The scorpion is referred to as frequenting the Sinai Desert (Dt 8:15).<\/p>\n<p>A scorpion has from six to eight eyes. It has eight legs like a spider and two lobsterlike claws with which it catches and holds its prey. It feeds particularly on locusts and beetles. In many species the female scorpion eats the male after mating. Scorpions lay eggs that hatch very shortly after laying. Scorpions prefer warmer climates, and because of their desire for warmth, enter houses, especially at night, hiding in beds, blankets, footwear, and clothing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sheep\">Sheep<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animal, <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> referred to directly or by some term such as ewe, lamb, ram, or by some fact concerning them over 700 times in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Sheep represented the chief wealth and total livelihood of pastoral peoples, providing food to eat, milk to drink, wool for the making of cloth, and hides and bones for other uses. In addition, the sheep was a medium of exchange and a sacrificial animal. The number of sheep raised in ancient times was prodigious. Mesha, king of Moab, paid a tribute annually of 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams (2 Kgs 3:4). The Israelites took 250,000 sheep from the Hagrites (1 Chr 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>Sheep shearing was often done for festivals (2 Sm 13:23). The sheep was held down on its side and its legs were tied together; then it lay docilely while its wool was clipped (Is 53:7). Sheep reserved for burnt offerings were not shorn; nothing could be held back from a sacrifice to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Wool had to be processed before it could be used for clothing. First it was washed, sometimes while still on the sheep, then carded and perhaps weighed for the market. The spinning of wool was regarded as a woman’s work (Prv 31:19), but weaving the spun thread into cloth on a loom was primarily a man’s occupation.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible reports that Abel kept sheep (Gn 4:2). The first sheep to be domesticated was probably the argali <em>(Ovis ammon),<\/em> a variety of the urial <em>(Ovis vignei),<\/em> a mountainous species still existing in Turkestan and Mongolia. Five breeds had reached Mesopotamia by 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; all were of the urial stock.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep known in Israel was the broad-tailed sheep <em>(Ovis orientalis vignei<\/em> or <em>laticaudata),<\/em> of which the tail weighs from 10 to 15 pounds (4.5 to 6.8 kilograms) and has always been considered a delicacy. Thus the Lord asked for this choice part as a sacrifice (Ex 29:22-25).<\/p>\n<p>Only the ram of the broad-tailed sheep has horns, but in other varieties of sheep in the Holy Land the ewe also has horns. The horns, two to three inches (5 to 8 centimeters) in diameter, can be potent weapons. Rams’ horns could be used as trumpets (Jos 6:4) or as oil containers (1 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\n<p>Although the sheep is very similar to the goat, it is differentiated by a lower forehead, its angulated spiral horns marked with transverse wrinkles and curved slightly outward, its covering of wool, and its lack of a “goatee.” Most sheep are white (Ps 147:16; Is 1:18; Dn 7:9; Rv 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>The flesh of sheep was a luxury in the biblical culture. King Solomon required a daily provision of 100 sheep for his table (1 Kgs 4:23), but the common people ate lamb or mutton only on festive occasions. A young ram was usually chosen because the ewes were more important to the future prospects of the herd. The meat was boiled in large caldrons. The milk of the sheep is extremely rich; in biblical times it was usually allowed to curdle before drinking. Possibly some Israelites kept lambs in their houses as pets (2 Sm 12:3-4).<\/p>\n<p>To protect the flock at night against predatory attacks, the shepherd tried to provide a fold. In meadows near villages, folds were built and watchmen were hired to relieve the shepherds. The shepherds of the nativity story were out in the field (Lk 2:8); they had no fold but probably had set up a tent for shelter, consisting simply of goat-hair blankets spread across sapling supports. The scarcity of springs in the Holy Land made the watering of the flock a crucial problem for the shepherd (Gn 13:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>Wild mountain sheep, varieties of <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> are known in the Mediterranean area (Dt 14:5). The Deuteronomy passage (<span>kjv<\/span> “chamois”) might also refer to <em>Ovis traelaphus,<\/em> a sheep about five feet high (1.5 meters) with long, curved horns. Another possibility is the Barbary sheep that lives in small flocks in rugged mountain areas in Barbary, Egypt, and Mt Sinai. The true chamois is unknown in Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep is also used figuratively in Scripture. The ram represented great strength and fittingly symbolized Medo-Persia in Daniel’s vision (Dn 8:3). It is the nature of sheep to be gentle and submissive (Is 53:7; Jer 11:19), defenseless (Mi 5:8; Mt 10:16), and in constant need of guidance and care (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36). Such qualities are regarded as desirable in the lives of believers in Christ; hence the many figurative references to sheep in the NT and to Jesus as shepherd (Mk 6:34; Jn 10:1-30; Rom 8:35-37; Heb 13:20-21; 1 Pt 2:25). The resurrected Christ told the apostle Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snail\">Snail<\/p>\n<p>Invertebrate gastropods (mollusks). Land snails are very numerous in the Near East. Some freshwater forms serve as hosts for the schistosome worm, the fluke parasite causing the dread disease bilharzia (schistosomiasis).<\/p>\n<p>Purple dyes of all shades were highly valued in the ancient world. A royal purple dye was obtained from secretions of a sea snail <em>(Murex trunculus<\/em> and <em>Murex brandaris).<\/em> Evidently, that process was developed by Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Assyrians as early as 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The “purple” fishermen had their own guild during the time of the Roman Empire. The snails were harvested during the fall and winter seasons; in the spring, when egg laying took place, little dye was available. The snails tended to remain concealed in the summer. They inhabited the waters off Crete and Phoenicia. Tyrian purple, produced in the Phoenician city of Tyre, the center of the purple-dye industry, was obtained by a double dyeing. Large deposits of murex shells from dyeing operations have been found along the Mediterranean shoreline. The Israelites had to import purple goods (Ez 27:16). Lydia was a “seller of purple” or of cloth so dyed (Acts 16:14). Purple was a sign of distinction, royalty, and wealth (cf. Ex 25:4; 28:5-6, 15; Nm 15:38; 2 Chr 2:7; Est 8:15; Prv 31:22; Sg 3:10; Ez 27:7; Dn 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 30:34-35 refers to “onycha,” which was an important ingredient of incense. Onycha is the horny, clawlike operculum (the plate that closes off the opening of its shell when a snail is retracted) of a Near Eastern member of the molluskan family Strombidae. The operculum is sometimes used for offense or locomotion as well as for defense. When burned, the operculum gives off a sharp, strong scent, and when mixed with more fragrant but less powerful substances is even more potent. The name “onycha” is derived from a Greek word <em>(onyx)<\/em> for a fingernail or a claw.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snake\">Snake<\/p>\n<p>Various species of snake, suborder Ophidia (Serpentes). In the Bible nine Hebrew words and four Greek ones refer to snakes. The most common Hebrew word is onomatopoeic—that is, it is an imitation of a snake hissing or of the sound it produces as it scrapes its scales along the ground (cf. Jer 46:22). Many types of snakes lay eggs (Is 59:5), although some retain the eggs in the body until ready to hatch.<\/p>\n<p>Snakes are among the most widespread reptiles and are found on all continents except Antarctica; they decrease in numbers and species toward the poles but increase as one approaches the equator. Thirty-three species of snakes are known in Palestine and neighboring countries, 20 of which are poisonous. Two dangerous characteristics of the snake noted by biblical writers are its inconspicuous way of moving and the ease with which it hides itself.<\/p>\n<p>Many snakes are able to swallow animals several times their own diameter because of their unusually flexible jaw mechanism. They lack not only legs but also movable eyelids. Snakes periodically shed their skins. The tongue is actually a hearing apparatus sensitive to airborne vibrations and probably to heat waves.<\/p>\n<p>The venom of poisonous species is a clear, thin secretion, transmitted to the victim’s bloodstream by means of fangs. Two types of venom are known: that of the vipers, which affects respiration and disintegrates red blood cells, and that of the cobras, which paralyzes the nervous system.<\/p>\n<p>The “asp” referred to in the Bible is probably the cobra; the “adder” is the viper. The “cockatrice” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is probably the adder. Serpents were associated with worship in Canaanite religion and symbolized evil deities among many other peoples. Steles (upright stones bearing inscriptions) have been unearthed at several sites in the Holy Land and Syria depicting a god or worshiper with a snake winding about the legs or body. Because the Israelites were burning incense in pagan worship of Moses’ bronze serpent (Nm 21:8-9), King Hezekiah destroyed it in his religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Although snakes have been an object of veneration in some religions, in the Judeo-Christian tradition snakes represent evil and, more specifically, the devil. That association began in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:1-15) and is also found in the book of Revelation (12:9; 20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adder (above); Asp (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Spider\">Spider<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the order Araneida. Between 600 and 700 different species inhabit the Holy Land. Spiders are different from insects in that, like scorpions, they have four pairs of legs instead of three. Spiders are equipped with poison glands—the effectiveness varying from species to species. A few can kill only insects, but others can also kill birds and mice.<\/p>\n<p>Most spiders have a pair of spinnerets attached to silk glands on the underside of the abdomen; from them a web is extruded. In the Bible the spider’s web is referred to as a symbol of frailty and insecurity (Jb 8:14; Is 59:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sponge\">Sponge<\/p>\n<p>Simple marine animals, phylum Porifera. The term “sponge” also refers to those animals’ skeletal remains. The sponge has a porous body composed of tubules and cells.<\/p>\n<p>Sponge fishing was well known in the Mediterranean area in ancient times. It was practiced particularly along the Anatolian and Syrian coasts. Sponges were harvested by divers. The use of sponges in absorbing liquids is referred to in the Bible (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Unicorn\">Unicorn<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Wild Ox (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wasp\">Wasp<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the family Vespidae. Hornets are social wasps that build large aerial apartment houses in which 1,000 or more individuals may live. In the Bible the hornet is used as a metaphor for God’s use of military forces (Ex 23:28; Dt 7:20; Jos 24:12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Whale\">Whale<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all living creatures, including those that have become extinct. Whales are air-breathing mammals of the order Cetacea.<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of whales visit the shores of the Holy Land at times. The finback whale <em>(Balaenoptera physalus)<\/em> weighs about 200 tons (181 metric tons) and lives mainly in the Arctic region but sometimes passes through the Straits of Gibraltar to reach the eastern Mediterranean Sea. It feeds on small marine organisms that it strains through its whale bone; it does not have teeth. The finback whale’s esophagus is narrow.<\/p>\n<p>The sperm whale <em>(Physeter catodon),<\/em> about 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, has a curiously shaped head that looks like a battering ram. The teeth in the lower jaw of the male sperm whale are about seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long. It feeds on big fish, even on sharks. It has a large throat opening.<\/p>\n<p>Whales are referred to in Genesis 1:21 and Job 7:12 (<span>kjv<\/span> only). The “great fish” of Jonah 2:1 need not have been a whale but could have been a large shark, such as the whale shark <em>(Rhineodon),<\/em> which grows 70 feet (21.3 meters) long and lacks the terrible teeth of other sharks. Whatever the actual marine organism, Jonah’s deliverance was miraculous. The Greek word for “whale” is sometimes used as a general term for “sea monster” or huge fish and may be used in that sense in Matthew 12:40.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WildOx\">Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>Large, fierce, fleet, intractable animal <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> It had a long, lean rump with a straight back and a long, narrow head. The animal described in Job 39:9-12 is clearly the wild ox. The two horns (Dt 33:17), its outstanding characteristic, were straight and as long as the head (Nm 23:22; 24:8; Ps 22:21). Kings often symbolized their dominion by wearing a helmet with two wild ox horns (cf. Pss 92:10; 132:17-18). The horns were often used as drinking vessels by the Israelites; some were large enough to hold four gallons (15 liters).<\/p>\n<p>Hunting the wild ox was a favorite sport of Assyrian kings. Tiglath-pileser I hunted it in the Lebanon Mountains about 1100 <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Ps 29:6). At one time the animal referred to in Job 39:9-12 was thought to be the oryx or antelope because of the similarity between the Hebrew word in Job and the Arabian name for oryx. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> called the wild ox a “unicorn” because of representations found on Babylonian mosaics and Egyptian drawings. Those representations showed it in strict profile, showing only one horn—hence, “unicorn.” Jerome’s Vulgate, a Latin Bible translation (fourth century <span>AD<\/span>) and Martin Luther’s German version translated it similarly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wolf\">Wolf<\/p>\n<p>Large doglike mammal <em>(Canis lupus)<\/em> that travels in bands of up to 30 animals. From the nose to the rump, the wolf measures about 3 feet (.9 meter); its drooping tail is about 18 inches (.5 meter) long. It looks much like a skinny German shepherd dog. The grayish yellow pelt is coarse and short haired.<\/p>\n<p>Wolves hunt singly or in relays, usually at night (Jer 5:6). Wolves have acute hearing and sight but rely chiefly on scent and usually catch their prey in a swift, open chase. The wolf has a reputation for boldness, fierceness, and voracity (Gn 49:27; Hb 1:8). It commonly kills more than it can eat or drag away and thus is known for its greediness.<\/p>\n<p>The wolf is a restless animal, always on the move; hunger drives it from one place to another in constant search of new hunting grounds. During spring and fall, wolves usually roam singly or in pairs, whereas in summer they may travel in family groups. In winter, several such groups may join to form a large pack. Wolves are intelligent, social creatures, faithful to their own kind. They mate for life. Individually, the wolf is a rather timid animal; it would much rather avoid human beings. But collectively wolves can be among the most dangerous animals alive.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Rome, and Greece the wolf was considered sacred. Wolves were well known in the Holy Land and are still found there and also in many places in Asia Minor. Shepherds continually battled with wolves that plundered their flocks (Jn 10:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to wolves in a literal sense in only three places (Is 11:6; 65:25; Jn 10:12), all other references being figurative. Usually the wolf is a symbol of enemies or the wicked (e.g., Ez 22:27; Zep 3:3; Acts 20:29). Both the wolf’s courage and its cruelty were probably in the mind of the patriarch Jacob when he predicted the fate of Benjamin’s tribe (Gn 49:27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Worm\">Worm<\/p>\n<p>Actually insect larvae in most biblical references, usually maggots, the larvae of flies (see Fly, above). For example, maggots are evidently referred to in accounts of worms feeding on spoiled manna (Ex 16:19-20), corpses (Jb 21:26; Is 14:11), or open wounds (Jb 7:5). Mark 9:48 refers to a maggot that eats dead flesh. In Acts 12:23 a fatal, worm-induced abdominal disease of King Herod is mentioned. In other cases, the reference is to the larvae of other insects (Is 51:8). In Deuteronomy 28:39 and Jonah 4:7 the vine weevil <em>(Cochylis ambiguella)<\/em> is probably referred to; it destroys vines by boring into their stems. Comparing a man to a worm is a metaphor for abasement (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANIMALS In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals ...","summary_en":"ANIMALS In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9254,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Demon","title_en":"Demon","content_ro":"<h3>DEMON<\/h3>\n<p>Fallen angel who, under the leadership of Satan, rebelled against God. Demonism is the activity of demons, while demonology is the study of demons and their activity for the purpose of knowing the tactics of the enemy (2 Cor 2:11) in order to properly exercise authority over them (Lk 10:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhoDemonsAre\">Who Demons Are<\/p>\n<p>The English word “demon” is derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">daimon<\/span><em>,<\/em> which essentially means “a divinity, a deity” (i.e., a false deity, a demon; cf. 1 Cor 10:20). Any deity other than the one true God is a spirit opposed to him; therefore, such a spirit is an evil spirit, or demon. The word “demon” does not appear in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which mistranslates <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">daimon<\/span> as “devil.” There is only one devil (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">diabolos<\/span>), who is known by a variety of names, titles, and epithets in the Bible. He is the prince or ruler of all the other demons, who are subject to him.<\/p>\n<p>Often in the Bible the word “spirit” is used for demon, along with a descriptive or identifying phrase; for example, “evil spirit” (Acts 19:12-13), “unclean spirit” (Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23, 26; Acts 5:16), “spirit of infirmity” (Lk 13:11), “dumb and deaf spirit” (Mk 9:25) (all quotes from the <span>rsv<\/span>). Spirits may be identified by their specific role or function, such as a spirit of murder, suicide, lust, depression, fear, lying, etc., associating them with various sins or attitudes contrary to God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Hebrew OT there is no word for “demon.” The term “evil spirit” occurs (Jgs 9:23; 1 Sm 16:14-23; 18:10; 19:9). In the <span>kjv<\/span> there are references to “a lying spirit” (1 Kgs 22:22-23; 2 Chr 18:20-22), “familiar spirit” (1 Chr 10:13; 2 Chr 33:6), “perverse spirit” (Is 19:14), “spirit of deep sleep” (29:10), and “spirit of whoredoms” (Hos 4:12; 5:4).<\/p>\n<p>A specific powerful demon referred to by title in the OT is “the prince of the kingdom of Persia,” who hindered the archangel Gabriel from coming to bring information to Daniel, so that the archangel Michael came to Gabriel’s assistance (Dn 10:13).<\/p>\n<p>The number of demons is unknown; it appears that it is a vast number, perhaps incalculable. From Revelation 12:4 it is inferred that one-third of the angels were led astray by Satan. This means that the hosts of heaven outnumber Satan’s powers by two to one. Ephesians 6:12 suggests an order or rank of demons: “principalities,” “powers,” “world rulers of this present darkness,” “spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Demons are created beings—personal, immortal, and incapable of reconciliation with God. They have great power as compared with humans, but little power as compared with God. God has given us authority over them, so that in the name of Jesus they must obey God’s people, even as they must obey the Lord himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatDemonsDo\">What Demons Do<\/p>\n<p>Angels were created to worship and praise God, to serve him, and to act as his messengers. The Bible states that they are “spirits sent from God to care for those who will receive salvation” (Heb 1:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). The fallen angels have a similar function but a different master. Their allegiance is to the devil, whom they serve out of fear and delusion. They desire to work with human beings, but their purpose is to carry out the schemes of Satan and to oppose God. They tempt, deceive, and delude people so as to bring them to eternal damnation. In opposing God they attack, oppress, hinder, and accuse the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Since Satan is not omnipresent, he uses his demonic hosts to execute his will; for example, in the parable of the sower (Mt 13:3-9; Mk 4:1-20; Lk 8:4-15) they snatch away the word before it can take root (Mk 4:15). By persecution, Satan causes some to fall away before they have made a genuine commitment (v 17). By the cares of the world and the delight in riches and the desire for material things, he chokes the word so that little or no fruit is produced (v 19).<\/p>\n<p>Basically, demons operate according to the pattern set by Satan in his threefold approach with Eve: (1) they deny the truth of the word of God and challenge its statements; (2) they deny the reality of death (typically they substitute something like reincarnation); and (3) they appeal to human vanity and pride by telling men and women that they can become like God or be gods (Gn 3:1-5). These also are the basic methods and teachings underlying most cults and false religions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDestinyofDemons\">The Final Destiny of Demons<\/p>\n<p>It is written concerning the angels who sinned that God “cast them into hell and committed them to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment” (2 Pt 2:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). The Lord spoke of the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels, into which the cursed among humans are also to go (Mt 25:41). Eventually Satan and his host will be thrown into the lake of fire (Rv 20:10), which is also the place of eternal torment for all whose names are not written in the Book of Life (vv 12-15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Demon-possession.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEMON<\/h3>\n<p>Fallen angel who, under the leadership of Satan, rebelled against God. Demonism is the activity of demons, while demonology is the study of demons and their activity for the purpose of knowing the tactics of the enemy (2 Cor 2:11) in order to properly exercise authority over them (Lk 10:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhoDemonsAre\">Who Demons Are<\/p>\n<p>The English word “demon” is derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">daimon<\/span><em>,<\/em> which essentially means “a divinity, a deity” (i.e., a false deity, a demon; cf. 1 Cor 10:20). Any deity other than the one true God is a spirit opposed to him; therefore, such a spirit is an evil spirit, or demon. The word “demon” does not appear in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which mistranslates <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">daimon<\/span> as “devil.” There is only one devil (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">diabolos<\/span>), who is known by a variety of names, titles, and epithets in the Bible. He is the prince or ruler of all the other demons, who are subject to him.<\/p>\n<p>Often in the Bible the word “spirit” is used for demon, along with a descriptive or identifying phrase; for example, “evil spirit” (Acts 19:12-13), “unclean spirit” (Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23, 26; Acts 5:16), “spirit of infirmity” (Lk 13:11), “dumb and deaf spirit” (Mk 9:25) (all quotes from the <span>rsv<\/span>). Spirits may be identified by their specific role or function, such as a spirit of murder, suicide, lust, depression, fear, lying, etc., associating them with various sins or attitudes contrary to God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Hebrew OT there is no word for “demon.” The term “evil spirit” occurs (Jgs 9:23; 1 Sm 16:14-23; 18:10; 19:9). In the <span>kjv<\/span> there are references to “a lying spirit” (1 Kgs 22:22-23; 2 Chr 18:20-22), “familiar spirit” (1 Chr 10:13; 2 Chr 33:6), “perverse spirit” (Is 19:14), “spirit of deep sleep” (29:10), and “spirit of whoredoms” (Hos 4:12; 5:4).<\/p>\n<p>A specific powerful demon referred to by title in the OT is “the prince of the kingdom of Persia,” who hindered the archangel Gabriel from coming to bring information to Daniel, so that the archangel Michael came to Gabriel’s assistance (Dn 10:13).<\/p>\n<p>The number of demons is unknown; it appears that it is a vast number, perhaps incalculable. From Revelation 12:4 it is inferred that one-third of the angels were led astray by Satan. This means that the hosts of heaven outnumber Satan’s powers by two to one. Ephesians 6:12 suggests an order or rank of demons: “principalities,” “powers,” “world rulers of this present darkness,” “spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Demons are created beings—personal, immortal, and incapable of reconciliation with God. They have great power as compared with humans, but little power as compared with God. God has given us authority over them, so that in the name of Jesus they must obey God’s people, even as they must obey the Lord himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatDemonsDo\">What Demons Do<\/p>\n<p>Angels were created to worship and praise God, to serve him, and to act as his messengers. The Bible states that they are “spirits sent from God to care for those who will receive salvation” (Heb 1:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). The fallen angels have a similar function but a different master. Their allegiance is to the devil, whom they serve out of fear and delusion. They desire to work with human beings, but their purpose is to carry out the schemes of Satan and to oppose God. They tempt, deceive, and delude people so as to bring them to eternal damnation. In opposing God they attack, oppress, hinder, and accuse the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Since Satan is not omnipresent, he uses his demonic hosts to execute his will; for example, in the parable of the sower (Mt 13:3-9; Mk 4:1-20; Lk 8:4-15) they snatch away the word before it can take root (Mk 4:15). By persecution, Satan causes some to fall away before they have made a genuine commitment (v 17). By the cares of the world and the delight in riches and the desire for material things, he chokes the word so that little or no fruit is produced (v 19).<\/p>\n<p>Basically, demons operate according to the pattern set by Satan in his threefold approach with Eve: (1) they deny the truth of the word of God and challenge its statements; (2) they deny the reality of death (typically they substitute something like reincarnation); and (3) they appeal to human vanity and pride by telling men and women that they can become like God or be gods (Gn 3:1-5). These also are the basic methods and teachings underlying most cults and false religions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDestinyofDemons\">The Final Destiny of Demons<\/p>\n<p>It is written concerning the angels who sinned that God “cast them into hell and committed them to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment” (2 Pt 2:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). The Lord spoke of the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels, into which the cursed among humans are also to go (Mt 25:41). Eventually Satan and his host will be thrown into the lake of fire (Rv 20:10), which is also the place of eternal torment for all whose names are not written in the Book of Life (vv 12-15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Demon-possession.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEMON Fallen angel who, under the leadership of Satan, rebelled against God. Demonism is the activity of demons, while demonology is the study of demons and their activity for the purpose of knowing the tactics of the enemy (2 Cor 2:11) in order to properly exercise authority over them (Lk 10:19). Who Demons Are The English word “demon” is derived from the Greek daimon, which essentially means “a divinity, a deity” (i.e., a false deity, a demon; cf. 1 Cor 10:20). Any deity other than the one ...","summary_en":"DEMON Fallen angel who, under the leadership of Satan, rebelled against God. Demonism is the activity of demons, while demonology is the study of demons and their activity for the purpose of knowing the tactics of the enemy (2 Cor 2:11) in order to properly exercise authority over them (Lk 10:19). Who Demons Are The English word “demon” is derived from the Greek daimon, which essentially means “a divinity, a deity” (i.e., a false deity, a demon; cf. 1 Cor 10:20). Any deity other than the one ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31021,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Power","title_en":"Power","content_ro":"<h3>POWER<\/h3>\n<p>Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnlimitedPowerofGod\">The Unlimited Power of God<\/p>\n<p>God is almighty and all other power is derived from him and subject to him. Much that the Bible says is summed up in the words of 1 Chronicles 29:11-12 addressed to God in praise: “Thine, O <span>Lord<\/span>, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O <span>Lord<\/span>. . . . thou rulest over all. In thy hand are power and might; and in thy hand it is to make great and to give strength to all” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Using human terms, the OT often speaks of God’s “mighty hand” and his “outstretched arm,” both being used for the power of God in action (Ex 6:6; 7:4; Ps 44:2-3). His power is seen in creation (Ps 65:6; Is 40:26; Jer 10:12; 27:5), in his rule over the world (2 Chr 20:6), in his acts of salvation and judgment (Ex 15:6; Dt 26:8), and in all that he does for his people (Ps 111:6). The NT, as well as the OT, speaks of the mighty power of God. Ephesians 1:19 speaks of the immeasurable greatness of his power, and the words of Jesus in Matthew 26:64 show that the word could be substituted for the very name of God when he said that the Son of Man would be seen “seated at the right hand of Power.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLimitedPowerGodGivestoHisCreatures\">The Limited Power God Gives to His Creatures<\/p>\n<p>Animals have power, as is particularly evident in the wild ox, the horse, and the lion (Jb 39:11, 19; Prv 30:30). There is power in wind and storm, thunder and lightning. Power is given to humans: physical strength (Jgs 16:5-6), power to fight (6:12), and the power to do good and the power to do harm (Gn 31:29; Prv 3:27; Mi 2:1). Rulers have God-given power and authority (Rom 13:1). The Bible also speaks of the power of angels (2 Pt 2:11) and of spiritual beings known as “principalities and powers.” Certain powers are given to Satan (see Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-6). Sin, evil, and death are allowed to have some power over men (Hos 13:14; Lk 22:53; Rom 3:9). All of these, however, have only limited power, and God is able to give his people strength to conquer all these powers. He can save them from the power of animals (Dn 6:27; Lk 10:19) and from the power of other people over them. To Pilate Jesus said, “You would have no power over me at all unless it were given to you from above” (Jn 19:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). He is able to deliver people from the power of sin and death, from Satan, and from all the spiritual forces of evil (2 Cor 10:4; Eph 6:10-18). The “ruler of this world” could ultimately have no power over Christ (Jn 14:30) and so cannot have power over those who rely on him.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodSeeninJesusChrist\">The Power of God Seen in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels and the book of Acts bear frequent witness to the power of Christ. Power was shown in his miracles (Mt 11:20; Acts 2:22), in his works of healing and exorcism (Lk 4:36; 5:17; 6:19; Acts 10:38). Power is shown supremely in his resurrection. Jesus speaks of his power to give up his life and power to take it again (Jn 10:18), but the NT speaks most frequently of the power of God the Father shown in the raising of his Son from the dead (Rom 1:4; Eph 1:19-20). In the end he will be seen coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (Mt 24:30). With regard to his human life on earth, however, it may be noted in the light of what follows that he lived and did his mighty works in the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk 4:14; Acts 10:38).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodintheLivesofHisPeople\">The Power of God in the Lives of His People<\/p>\n<p>In the OT it is often said that the weak are made strong by the power of God. He empowers those who are weak (Is 40:29) so that they may increase from strength to strength (Ps 84:7; see also Pss 68:35; 138:3). We read in particular of his power being given to prophets (Mi 3:8) and kings (1 Sm 2:10; Ps 21:1), and it is said that in an outstanding way power will be given to the Messiah (Is 9:6; 11:2; Mi 5:4). But to all God’s people power is offered that they may live for him and serve him (Is 49:5). When we turn to the NT, we read of the gospel itself as being the power of God for salvation—to everyone who has faith (Rom 1:16). “To all who received him [Jesus Christ], who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God” (Jn 1:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). In that life as children of God, power is received from the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:8), inner strength to live in his service (Eph 3:16), power to be his witnesses (Lk 24:49; Acts 1:8), power to endure suffering (2 Tm 1:8), power for ministry (Eph 3:7), power in the face of weakness (2 Cor 12:9), power through prayer (Jas 5:16), and power to be kept from evil (1 Pt 1:5). Those who do great things in the service of Christ do not do them in their own strength (Acts 3:12); he sent out his disciples confident only in the assurance that all things are under his authority and that they would have the power of his unfailing presence with them (Mt 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Principalities and Powers.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POWER<\/h3>\n<p>Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnlimitedPowerofGod\">The Unlimited Power of God<\/p>\n<p>God is almighty and all other power is derived from him and subject to him. Much that the Bible says is summed up in the words of 1 Chronicles 29:11-12 addressed to God in praise: “Thine, O <span>Lord<\/span>, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O <span>Lord<\/span>. . . . thou rulest over all. In thy hand are power and might; and in thy hand it is to make great and to give strength to all” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Using human terms, the OT often speaks of God’s “mighty hand” and his “outstretched arm,” both being used for the power of God in action (Ex 6:6; 7:4; Ps 44:2-3). His power is seen in creation (Ps 65:6; Is 40:26; Jer 10:12; 27:5), in his rule over the world (2 Chr 20:6), in his acts of salvation and judgment (Ex 15:6; Dt 26:8), and in all that he does for his people (Ps 111:6). The NT, as well as the OT, speaks of the mighty power of God. Ephesians 1:19 speaks of the immeasurable greatness of his power, and the words of Jesus in Matthew 26:64 show that the word could be substituted for the very name of God when he said that the Son of Man would be seen “seated at the right hand of Power.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLimitedPowerGodGivestoHisCreatures\">The Limited Power God Gives to His Creatures<\/p>\n<p>Animals have power, as is particularly evident in the wild ox, the horse, and the lion (Jb 39:11, 19; Prv 30:30). There is power in wind and storm, thunder and lightning. Power is given to humans: physical strength (Jgs 16:5-6), power to fight (6:12), and the power to do good and the power to do harm (Gn 31:29; Prv 3:27; Mi 2:1). Rulers have God-given power and authority (Rom 13:1). The Bible also speaks of the power of angels (2 Pt 2:11) and of spiritual beings known as “principalities and powers.” Certain powers are given to Satan (see Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-6). Sin, evil, and death are allowed to have some power over men (Hos 13:14; Lk 22:53; Rom 3:9). All of these, however, have only limited power, and God is able to give his people strength to conquer all these powers. He can save them from the power of animals (Dn 6:27; Lk 10:19) and from the power of other people over them. To Pilate Jesus said, “You would have no power over me at all unless it were given to you from above” (Jn 19:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). He is able to deliver people from the power of sin and death, from Satan, and from all the spiritual forces of evil (2 Cor 10:4; Eph 6:10-18). The “ruler of this world” could ultimately have no power over Christ (Jn 14:30) and so cannot have power over those who rely on him.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodSeeninJesusChrist\">The Power of God Seen in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels and the book of Acts bear frequent witness to the power of Christ. Power was shown in his miracles (Mt 11:20; Acts 2:22), in his works of healing and exorcism (Lk 4:36; 5:17; 6:19; Acts 10:38). Power is shown supremely in his resurrection. Jesus speaks of his power to give up his life and power to take it again (Jn 10:18), but the NT speaks most frequently of the power of God the Father shown in the raising of his Son from the dead (Rom 1:4; Eph 1:19-20). In the end he will be seen coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (Mt 24:30). With regard to his human life on earth, however, it may be noted in the light of what follows that he lived and did his mighty works in the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk 4:14; Acts 10:38).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodintheLivesofHisPeople\">The Power of God in the Lives of His People<\/p>\n<p>In the OT it is often said that the weak are made strong by the power of God. He empowers those who are weak (Is 40:29) so that they may increase from strength to strength (Ps 84:7; see also Pss 68:35; 138:3). We read in particular of his power being given to prophets (Mi 3:8) and kings (1 Sm 2:10; Ps 21:1), and it is said that in an outstanding way power will be given to the Messiah (Is 9:6; 11:2; Mi 5:4). But to all God’s people power is offered that they may live for him and serve him (Is 49:5). When we turn to the NT, we read of the gospel itself as being the power of God for salvation—to everyone who has faith (Rom 1:16). “To all who received him [Jesus Christ], who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God” (Jn 1:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). In that life as children of God, power is received from the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:8), inner strength to live in his service (Eph 3:16), power to be his witnesses (Lk 24:49; Acts 1:8), power to endure suffering (2 Tm 1:8), power for ministry (Eph 3:7), power in the face of weakness (2 Cor 12:9), power through prayer (Jas 5:16), and power to be kept from evil (1 Pt 1:5). Those who do great things in the service of Christ do not do them in their own strength (Acts 3:12); he sent out his disciples confident only in the assurance that all things are under his authority and that they would have the power of his unfailing presence with them (Mt 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Principalities and Powers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POWER Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people. The Unlimited Power of God God is almighty ...","summary_en":"POWER Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people. The Unlimited Power of God God is almighty ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55884,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:19","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:19<\/strong> <em>Snakes and scorpions<\/em> were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • <em>Nothing will injure you:<\/em> This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:19<\/strong> <em>Snakes and scorpions<\/em> were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • <em>Nothing will injure you:<\/em> This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:19 Snakes and scorpions were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • Nothing will injure you: This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).","summary_en":"10:19 Snakes and scorpions were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • Nothing will injure you: This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83510,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:19","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:19<\/strong> <em>Snakes and scorpions<\/em> were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • <em>Nothing will injure you:<\/em> This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:19<\/strong> <em>Snakes and scorpions<\/em> were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • <em>Nothing will injure you:<\/em> This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:19 Snakes and scorpions were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • Nothing will injure you: This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).","summary_en":"10:19 Snakes and scorpions were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • Nothing will injure you: This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111136,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:19","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:19<\/strong> <em>Snakes and scorpions<\/em> were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • <em>Nothing will injure you:<\/em> This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:19<\/strong> <em>Snakes and scorpions<\/em> were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • <em>Nothing will injure you:<\/em> This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:19 Snakes and scorpions were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • Nothing will injure you: This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).","summary_en":"10:19 Snakes and scorpions were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • Nothing will injure you: This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138762,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:19","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:19<\/strong> <em>Snakes and scorpions<\/em> were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • <em>Nothing will injure you:<\/em> This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:19<\/strong> <em>Snakes and scorpions<\/em> were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • <em>Nothing will injure you:<\/em> This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:19 Snakes and scorpions were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • Nothing will injure you: This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).","summary_en":"10:19 Snakes and scorpions were symbols of danger and evil (see Num 21:6-9; Deut 8:15; 1 Kgs 12:14; Isa 11:8; Ezek 2:6). Satan is the ancient serpent who tempted Eve (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20; Rev 12:9; 20:2), and demonic forces are described as scorpions (Rev 9:3-4). • Nothing will injure you: This didn’t mean that Jesus’ followers should take dangerous chances. The point is that God protects his servants (e.g., Acts 28:3-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":5526,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Life","title_en":"Book of Life","content_ro":"<h3>BOOK OF LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Term used to refer to a heavenly record. The phrase appears seven times in the NT: Philippians 4:3; Revelation 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27. The Christian understanding of the phrase, however, is rooted in the OT. Passages such as Exodus 32:32; Psalm 87:6; Daniel 7:10; 12:1; and Malachi 3:16 imply or affirm a record kept by God. God is seen as keeping account of his people’s faithfulness and disobedience—and possibly that of other nations as well (e.g., Ps 87:6). Psalm 69:28 uses the phrase “book of the living”; parallel poetic lines refer to physical living.<\/p>\n<p>In Daniel 7:10; 12:1; and Malachi 3:16 references are linked with descriptions of final judgment and events of the end times. Names and deeds from the divine records are evidence set before a judge. Luke 10:20 and Hebrews 12:23 reflect similar thought; no concrete mention of a “book” is made but a heavenly record is assumed. In Philippians 4:3 Paul uses “Book of Life” to encourage his fellow workers in a lively hope for the future.<\/p>\n<p>“Book of Life” in the book of Revelation refers to a heavenly record with the names of persecuted Christians who remain faithful. It is used first in the letter to Sardis (3:5) where the risen Lord, identified as “the Lamb” is keeper of the book (13:8; 21:7). If a person’s name is found in the book, admittance is granted to new Jerusalem (20:15; 21:27). If one’s name is not written there, the judgment is final destruction. Absolute confidence in God’s care for his own is affirmed by the words “written before the foundation of the world” (13:8; 17:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Book of Remembrance.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BOOK OF LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Term used to refer to a heavenly record. The phrase appears seven times in the NT: Philippians 4:3; Revelation 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27. The Christian understanding of the phrase, however, is rooted in the OT. Passages such as Exodus 32:32; Psalm 87:6; Daniel 7:10; 12:1; and Malachi 3:16 imply or affirm a record kept by God. God is seen as keeping account of his people’s faithfulness and disobedience—and possibly that of other nations as well (e.g., Ps 87:6). Psalm 69:28 uses the phrase “book of the living”; parallel poetic lines refer to physical living.<\/p>\n<p>In Daniel 7:10; 12:1; and Malachi 3:16 references are linked with descriptions of final judgment and events of the end times. Names and deeds from the divine records are evidence set before a judge. Luke 10:20 and Hebrews 12:23 reflect similar thought; no concrete mention of a “book” is made but a heavenly record is assumed. In Philippians 4:3 Paul uses “Book of Life” to encourage his fellow workers in a lively hope for the future.<\/p>\n<p>“Book of Life” in the book of Revelation refers to a heavenly record with the names of persecuted Christians who remain faithful. It is used first in the letter to Sardis (3:5) where the risen Lord, identified as “the Lamb” is keeper of the book (13:8; 21:7). If a person’s name is found in the book, admittance is granted to new Jerusalem (20:15; 21:27). If one’s name is not written there, the judgment is final destruction. Absolute confidence in God’s care for his own is affirmed by the words “written before the foundation of the world” (13:8; 17:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Book of Remembrance.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BOOK OF LIFE Term used to refer to a heavenly record. The phrase appears seven times in the NT: Philippians 4:3; Revelation 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27. The Christian understanding of the phrase, however, is rooted in the OT. Passages such as Exodus 32:32; Psalm 87:6; Daniel 7:10; 12:1; and Malachi 3:16 imply or affirm a record kept by God. God is seen as keeping account of his people’s faithfulness and disobedience—and possibly that of other nations as well (e.g., Ps 87:6). Psalm 69:28...","summary_en":"BOOK OF LIFE Term used to refer to a heavenly record. The phrase appears seven times in the NT: Philippians 4:3; Revelation 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27. The Christian understanding of the phrase, however, is rooted in the OT. Passages such as Exodus 32:32; Psalm 87:6; Daniel 7:10; 12:1; and Malachi 3:16 imply or affirm a record kept by God. God is seen as keeping account of his people’s faithfulness and disobedience—and possibly that of other nations as well (e.g., Ps 87:6). Psalm 69:28...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19714,"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":55885,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:20","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:20<\/strong> Disciples should not <em>rejoice<\/em> in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • <em>your names are registered in heaven:<\/em> For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:20<\/strong> Disciples should not <em>rejoice<\/em> in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • <em>your names are registered in heaven:<\/em> For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:20 Disciples should not rejoice in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • your names are registered in heaven: For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.","summary_en":"10:20 Disciples should not rejoice in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • your names are registered in heaven: For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83511,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:20","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:20<\/strong> Disciples should not <em>rejoice<\/em> in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • <em>your names are registered in heaven:<\/em> For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:20<\/strong> Disciples should not <em>rejoice<\/em> in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • <em>your names are registered in heaven:<\/em> For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:20 Disciples should not rejoice in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • your names are registered in heaven: For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.","summary_en":"10:20 Disciples should not rejoice in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • your names are registered in heaven: For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111137,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:20","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:20<\/strong> Disciples should not <em>rejoice<\/em> in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • <em>your names are registered in heaven:<\/em> For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:20<\/strong> Disciples should not <em>rejoice<\/em> in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • <em>your names are registered in heaven:<\/em> For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:20 Disciples should not rejoice in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • your names are registered in heaven: For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.","summary_en":"10:20 Disciples should not rejoice in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • your names are registered in heaven: For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138763,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:20","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:20<\/strong> Disciples should not <em>rejoice<\/em> in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • <em>your names are registered in heaven:<\/em> For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:20<\/strong> Disciples should not <em>rejoice<\/em> in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • <em>your names are registered in heaven:<\/em> For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:20 Disciples should not rejoice in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • your names are registered in heaven: For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.","summary_en":"10:20 Disciples should not rejoice in their spiritual power, but in the greatness of God who freely gives them salvation. • your names are registered in heaven: For the record of salvation in heaven’s books, see Exod 32:32-33; Ps 69:28; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16-17; Phil 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":36114,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Spirit of God","title_en":"Spirit of God","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55886,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:21","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> <em>hiding these things:<\/em> God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame <em>those who think themselves wise<\/em> but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> <em>hiding these things:<\/em> God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame <em>those who think themselves wise<\/em> but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:21 hiding these things: God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame those who think themselves wise but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).","summary_en":"10:21 hiding these things: God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame those who think themselves wise but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83512,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:21","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> <em>hiding these things:<\/em> God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame <em>those who think themselves wise<\/em> but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> <em>hiding these things:<\/em> God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame <em>those who think themselves wise<\/em> but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:21 hiding these things: God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame those who think themselves wise but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).","summary_en":"10:21 hiding these things: God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame those who think themselves wise but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111138,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:21","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> <em>hiding these things:<\/em> God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame <em>those who think themselves wise<\/em> but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> <em>hiding these things:<\/em> God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame <em>those who think themselves wise<\/em> but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:21 hiding these things: God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame those who think themselves wise but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).","summary_en":"10:21 hiding these things: God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame those who think themselves wise but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138764,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:21","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> <em>hiding these things:<\/em> God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame <em>those who think themselves wise<\/em> but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> <em>hiding these things:<\/em> God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame <em>those who think themselves wise<\/em> but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:21 hiding these things: God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame those who think themselves wise but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).","summary_en":"10:21 hiding these things: God uses simple things that a child can understand to shame those who think themselves wise but are foolish in God’s eyes (see Isa 29:14; 1 Cor 1:18-31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":19627,"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":31603,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophecy","title_en":"Prophecy","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","summary_en":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55887,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:22","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:22<\/strong> The <em>Father<\/em> and the <em>Son<\/em> share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to <em>reveal<\/em> the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:22<\/strong> The <em>Father<\/em> and the <em>Son<\/em> share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to <em>reveal<\/em> the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:22 The Father and the Son share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to reveal the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).","summary_en":"10:22 The Father and the Son share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to reveal the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83513,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:22","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:22<\/strong> The <em>Father<\/em> and the <em>Son<\/em> share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to <em>reveal<\/em> the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:22<\/strong> The <em>Father<\/em> and the <em>Son<\/em> share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to <em>reveal<\/em> the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:22 The Father and the Son share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to reveal the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).","summary_en":"10:22 The Father and the Son share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to reveal the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111139,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:22","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:22<\/strong> The <em>Father<\/em> and the <em>Son<\/em> share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to <em>reveal<\/em> the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:22<\/strong> The <em>Father<\/em> and the <em>Son<\/em> share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to <em>reveal<\/em> the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:22 The Father and the Son share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to reveal the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).","summary_en":"10:22 The Father and the Son share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to reveal the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138765,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:22","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:22<\/strong> The <em>Father<\/em> and the <em>Son<\/em> share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to <em>reveal<\/em> the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:22<\/strong> The <em>Father<\/em> and the <em>Son<\/em> share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to <em>reveal<\/em> the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:22 The Father and the Son share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to reveal the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).","summary_en":"10:22 The Father and the Son share an intimate relationship. Jesus came to earth to reveal the Father to a lost world (see John 1:1-18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":21889,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55888,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:23","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:23<\/strong> <em>that see what you have seen:<\/em> The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:23<\/strong> <em>that see what you have seen:<\/em> The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:23 that see what you have seen: The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.","summary_en":"10:23 that see what you have seen: The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83514,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:23","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:23<\/strong> <em>that see what you have seen:<\/em> The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:23<\/strong> <em>that see what you have seen:<\/em> The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:23 that see what you have seen: The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.","summary_en":"10:23 that see what you have seen: The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111140,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:23","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:23<\/strong> <em>that see what you have seen:<\/em> The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:23<\/strong> <em>that see what you have seen:<\/em> The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:23 that see what you have seen: The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.","summary_en":"10:23 that see what you have seen: The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138766,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:23","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:23<\/strong> <em>that see what you have seen:<\/em> The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:23<\/strong> <em>that see what you have seen:<\/em> The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:23 that see what you have seen: The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.","summary_en":"10:23 that see what you have seen: The disciples witnessed the arrival of God’s promised salvation, the inauguration of the Kingdom of God.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":7240,"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":9464,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Deuteronomy","title_en":"Book of Deuteronomy","content_ro":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandAuthorship\">Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>Two basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\n<p>As early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his <em>Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\n<p>In recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\n<p>The fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalSetting\">Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>Moses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\n<p>In that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceofDeuteronomy\">Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>Deuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\n<p>The primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeuteronomyandtheLaw\">Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>To designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\n<p>The NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\n<p>Instructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Love is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, the <span>Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Moses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>Moses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n<p>“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\n<p>In the first century <span>AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\n<p>In worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\n<p>Canaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\n<p>Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\n<p>In human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\n<p>In domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\n<p>When the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\n<p>The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>After some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandAuthorship\">Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>Two basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\n<p>As early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his <em>Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\n<p>In recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\n<p>The fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalSetting\">Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>Moses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\n<p>In that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceofDeuteronomy\">Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>Deuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\n<p>The primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeuteronomyandtheLaw\">Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>To designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\n<p>The NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\n<p>Instructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Love is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, the <span>Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Moses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>Moses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n<p>“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\n<p>In the first century <span>AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\n<p>In worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\n<p>Canaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\n<p>Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\n<p>In human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\n<p>In domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\n<p>When the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\n<p>The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>After some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","summary_en":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17491,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Inheritance","title_en":"Inheritance","content_ro":"<h3>INHERITANCE<\/h3>\n<p>Legacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LegalandHistoricalAspect\">Legal and Historical Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchs<\/h5>\n<p>We learn something of early-second-millennium <span>BC<\/span> practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. Yet exceptions abound. Ishmael (Gn 16:15; 17:15-21), Esau (25:23), and Reuben (49:3-4) did not receive the birthright. Another item of special interest is Abraham’s suggestion that, in the absence of a son, his servant Eliezer might be regarded as the heir (15:2-5); scholars have found confirmation of this practice in Hurrian legal documents of the second millennium.<\/p>\n<h5>The Hebrew Nation<\/h5>\n<p>According to Deuteronomy 21:15-17, Hebrew firstborns were legally entitled to a double portion of the inheritance. Israelite law also made provision for widows through the practice of levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; see Gn 38:8; Ru 4:5).<\/p>\n<p>According to Numbers 27:1-11, the daughters of Zelophehad argued that they should receive the inheritance since their father had died without sons. Consequently, God decreed that if a man died without sons, the inheritance should be transferred to his daughter; if he had no daughter, to his brothers; if he had no brothers, to his nearest relatives. This particular incident also illustrates the importance of preserving tribal possessions: the daughters of Zelophehad were not allowed to marry outside the tribe of Manasseh, for this would mean transferral of the property to another tribe (Nm 36).<\/p>\n<p>How highly the Israelites valued their family’s inherited possessions may be gathered from Leviticus 25:25-28. If an individual sold his land for financial reasons, provision must be made for a relative to redeem it; if he had no near relative, he could still purchase it back at a later time, and even if he could not afford to do so, the land automatically reverted to him in the Year of Jubilee, when all debts were canceled (note also Lv 27:14-25).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from the reference to levirate marriage in Matthew 22:23-33 (Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-40), the NT has little to say about principles of property transferral during Roman times.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, the younger son in the family requested his share of the inheritance (Lk 15:12). One should also note that the elder son, who with false piety looked down on his brother’s behavior, had not protested when his brother asked for the inheritance; on the contrary, the elder brother too, without complaining, received his share—presumably a double portion.<\/p>\n<p>In another significant passage (Gal 4:1-2) Paul, seeking to illustrate a theological point, refers to secular practices. An heir, he tells us, is subject to guardians and managers during his childhood, up to the time he actually inherits. The point Paul wants to establish is clear enough, but the illustration does not coincide with what we know of Roman law and unfortunately scholars have been unable to identify the precise social custom in view. It may be that Paul was making reference, in general rather than strict legal terms, to some practice with which he and the Galatians were familiar.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalAspect\">Theological Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>Canaan as Israel’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>The conviction that God gave Palestine to the Israelites for their inheritance serves as a bridge between the historical and the theological data. The historical element lies in the obvious fact that the Promised Land, a physical entity, was certainly occupied by the Hebrews and distributed among their tribes. Theologically, however, the Scriptures speak of this occupation as a divine gift; in effect, even the method of distribution was based on the concept that the land belongs to God (Lv 25:23; see Ex 15:17; Jos 22:27; Ez 38:16; Jl 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>The theme goes back to Genesis 12:1-3. God, in choosing Abraham, instructed him to move to a new country and promised to make him a great and blessed nation (Heb 11:8). The significance of the land in this Abrahamic promise is made more explicit later, when we are told that God promised to give Canaan to Abraham’s descendants after four centuries of Egyptian bondage (Gn 15:12-21; see Acts 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Since Canaan was occupied by wicked inhabitants, the land was to be taken by force; to inherit the land therefore really means <em>to take possession<\/em> of it. Israel must trust God, whose land it is, to give them the victory (Jos 1:1-9; 21:43-45; Jgs 7:2; Ps 44:1-3; Acts 13:19). Once they conquered the land, it was apportioned among the tribes according to their size (following the instructions in Nm 26:52-54). God further commanded the people to divide the land by lot (vv 55-56). Thus, from the initial promise to Abraham, to the actual apportionment of the land and even with reference to the future (Is 60:21; Ez 45:1-8; 47:13–48:29), the people were made fully aware that their inheritance lay in the hands of a sovereign Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Believer’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT we find the concept of inheritance transferred from the purely physical to the spiritual. The tribe of Levi, which constituted the priestly clan, received no inheritance, because “the Lord is their inheritance” (Dt 18:1-2; see Nm 18:8-24). The Levites, in other words, received no land apportionment, but in their service to God they could begin to enjoy the fuller blessings to which the land inheritance pointed.<\/p>\n<p>That this truth could not be restricted to Levites is hinted at in Exodus 19:6, where the whole nation is called “a kingdom of priests” (see 1 Pt 2:9). Psalm 16 makes it clear that no one understood more clearly than David what those words entailed. Even if he were deprived of Israel’s physical inheritance, he had received by lot a more beautiful heritage, the Lord himself, in whose presence he found full joy and everlasting pleasures (Ps 16:5-6, 11; see also Pss 73:25-26; 142:5; Is 58:14; Lam 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>In later Judaism, during and after the intertestamental period, the figure was extended considerably. For example, the rabbis began to speak of the law as the inheritance of the faithful. Further, they might give the idea a negative turn, as when the wicked are said to inherit hell (cf. Jb 27:13). Neither of these figures is found in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>We also read in Jewish literature statements about inheriting the age to come, the kingdom, eternal life; these ideas occur frequently in the NT (Mt 19:29; 25:34; Lk 10:25; 18:18; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; Ti 3:7; Jas 2:5). Such an inheritance, however, belongs only to those who are sanctified by God’s word (Acts 20:32; 26:18; Col 1:12; note also Jn 17:17; Col 3:23-24). These future blessings do not exclude the physical (Mt 5:5; note Ps 37:11, 29; Is 60:21; Rom 4:13; 2 Pt 3:13), but they certainly exclude human frailty, for God’s inheritance is imperishable (1 Cor 15:50). In short, our heritage is nothing less than full salvation (Heb 1:14; 11:7), which God carefully guards for us in heaven (1 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\n<p>Doubtless, the most significant feature in the NT is its emphasis that, as a result of the work of Christ, his people begin even <em>now<\/em> to receive the promised inheritance. The Gospel of John frequently stresses the present reality of eternal life, as does the Letter to the Hebrews (cf. 6:12-17 with 9:15 and 11:13, 39-40).<\/p>\n<p>Paul treats this whole matter thoroughly in Galatians 3:7–4:7. In response to the Judaizers, who claim that the Abrahamic inheritance is restricted to those who become Jews through circumcision, Paul argues vigorously that Abraham’s true children are those who believe, whether Jew or Gentile (3:7; see Acts 26:16-18; Eph 3:6). They become heirs of God’s promise, for they receive the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The principle of inheritance is promise, not the Law (v 18). Those who believe are brought into union with Christ (vv 27-29); but then they are not merely Abraham’s children but God’s (v 26), for Christ is the Son of God and God has determined to send the Spirit of his Son to believers so that they too may call God <em>Father<\/em> (Gal 4:4-7; see also Rom 8:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Indeed, Christ himself as the Son is the true heir (Mt 21:38; Mk 12:7; Lk 20:14); he has inherited a name above every name (Phil 2:9; Heb 1:4) and has been appointed heir of all things (Heb 1:2; see Ps 2:7-8; Mt 28:18). But by his grace, all who become his through faith are counted joint heirs with him (Rom 8:17).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>With a bold shift in the metaphor, the Scriptures speak of believers as God’s inheritance. In the beautiful “Song of Moses” the author speaks of God as the Israelites’ Father (Dt 32:6), who has taken special interest in their inheritance (v 8). Then we are told why God cares: “For the <span>Lord<\/span>’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance” (Dt 32:9, <span>niv<\/span>). This theme becomes very prominent throughout the OT (e.g., Dt 9:26-29; 1 Kgs 8:51-53; Pss 28:9; 33:12; 74:2; Is 19:25; Jer 10:16; Zec 2:12). Elsewhere, Israel is spoken of as God’s special possession (e.g., Ex 19:5; Dt 7:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 1:14 “the redemption of the possession” refers to the final salvation of believers, who are God’s treasure. Further, “we have obtained an inheritance” (Eph 1:11) may well be translated, “we have been made an inheritance,” that is, been “chosen as God’s portion,” a view supported by verse 18. No more fundamental idea than this can be found in Scripture, and its essence is expressed by the words of the One who sits on the throne: “He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son” (Rv 21:7, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Lv 26:11-12; 2 Sm 7:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adoption; Birthright; Firstborn; Heir.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INHERITANCE<\/h3>\n<p>Legacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LegalandHistoricalAspect\">Legal and Historical Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchs<\/h5>\n<p>We learn something of early-second-millennium <span>BC<\/span> practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. Yet exceptions abound. Ishmael (Gn 16:15; 17:15-21), Esau (25:23), and Reuben (49:3-4) did not receive the birthright. Another item of special interest is Abraham’s suggestion that, in the absence of a son, his servant Eliezer might be regarded as the heir (15:2-5); scholars have found confirmation of this practice in Hurrian legal documents of the second millennium.<\/p>\n<h5>The Hebrew Nation<\/h5>\n<p>According to Deuteronomy 21:15-17, Hebrew firstborns were legally entitled to a double portion of the inheritance. Israelite law also made provision for widows through the practice of levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; see Gn 38:8; Ru 4:5).<\/p>\n<p>According to Numbers 27:1-11, the daughters of Zelophehad argued that they should receive the inheritance since their father had died without sons. Consequently, God decreed that if a man died without sons, the inheritance should be transferred to his daughter; if he had no daughter, to his brothers; if he had no brothers, to his nearest relatives. This particular incident also illustrates the importance of preserving tribal possessions: the daughters of Zelophehad were not allowed to marry outside the tribe of Manasseh, for this would mean transferral of the property to another tribe (Nm 36).<\/p>\n<p>How highly the Israelites valued their family’s inherited possessions may be gathered from Leviticus 25:25-28. If an individual sold his land for financial reasons, provision must be made for a relative to redeem it; if he had no near relative, he could still purchase it back at a later time, and even if he could not afford to do so, the land automatically reverted to him in the Year of Jubilee, when all debts were canceled (note also Lv 27:14-25).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from the reference to levirate marriage in Matthew 22:23-33 (Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-40), the NT has little to say about principles of property transferral during Roman times.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, the younger son in the family requested his share of the inheritance (Lk 15:12). One should also note that the elder son, who with false piety looked down on his brother’s behavior, had not protested when his brother asked for the inheritance; on the contrary, the elder brother too, without complaining, received his share—presumably a double portion.<\/p>\n<p>In another significant passage (Gal 4:1-2) Paul, seeking to illustrate a theological point, refers to secular practices. An heir, he tells us, is subject to guardians and managers during his childhood, up to the time he actually inherits. The point Paul wants to establish is clear enough, but the illustration does not coincide with what we know of Roman law and unfortunately scholars have been unable to identify the precise social custom in view. It may be that Paul was making reference, in general rather than strict legal terms, to some practice with which he and the Galatians were familiar.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalAspect\">Theological Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>Canaan as Israel’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>The conviction that God gave Palestine to the Israelites for their inheritance serves as a bridge between the historical and the theological data. The historical element lies in the obvious fact that the Promised Land, a physical entity, was certainly occupied by the Hebrews and distributed among their tribes. Theologically, however, the Scriptures speak of this occupation as a divine gift; in effect, even the method of distribution was based on the concept that the land belongs to God (Lv 25:23; see Ex 15:17; Jos 22:27; Ez 38:16; Jl 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>The theme goes back to Genesis 12:1-3. God, in choosing Abraham, instructed him to move to a new country and promised to make him a great and blessed nation (Heb 11:8). The significance of the land in this Abrahamic promise is made more explicit later, when we are told that God promised to give Canaan to Abraham’s descendants after four centuries of Egyptian bondage (Gn 15:12-21; see Acts 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Since Canaan was occupied by wicked inhabitants, the land was to be taken by force; to inherit the land therefore really means <em>to take possession<\/em> of it. Israel must trust God, whose land it is, to give them the victory (Jos 1:1-9; 21:43-45; Jgs 7:2; Ps 44:1-3; Acts 13:19). Once they conquered the land, it was apportioned among the tribes according to their size (following the instructions in Nm 26:52-54). God further commanded the people to divide the land by lot (vv 55-56). Thus, from the initial promise to Abraham, to the actual apportionment of the land and even with reference to the future (Is 60:21; Ez 45:1-8; 47:13–48:29), the people were made fully aware that their inheritance lay in the hands of a sovereign Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Believer’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT we find the concept of inheritance transferred from the purely physical to the spiritual. The tribe of Levi, which constituted the priestly clan, received no inheritance, because “the Lord is their inheritance” (Dt 18:1-2; see Nm 18:8-24). The Levites, in other words, received no land apportionment, but in their service to God they could begin to enjoy the fuller blessings to which the land inheritance pointed.<\/p>\n<p>That this truth could not be restricted to Levites is hinted at in Exodus 19:6, where the whole nation is called “a kingdom of priests” (see 1 Pt 2:9). Psalm 16 makes it clear that no one understood more clearly than David what those words entailed. Even if he were deprived of Israel’s physical inheritance, he had received by lot a more beautiful heritage, the Lord himself, in whose presence he found full joy and everlasting pleasures (Ps 16:5-6, 11; see also Pss 73:25-26; 142:5; Is 58:14; Lam 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>In later Judaism, during and after the intertestamental period, the figure was extended considerably. For example, the rabbis began to speak of the law as the inheritance of the faithful. Further, they might give the idea a negative turn, as when the wicked are said to inherit hell (cf. Jb 27:13). Neither of these figures is found in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>We also read in Jewish literature statements about inheriting the age to come, the kingdom, eternal life; these ideas occur frequently in the NT (Mt 19:29; 25:34; Lk 10:25; 18:18; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; Ti 3:7; Jas 2:5). Such an inheritance, however, belongs only to those who are sanctified by God’s word (Acts 20:32; 26:18; Col 1:12; note also Jn 17:17; Col 3:23-24). These future blessings do not exclude the physical (Mt 5:5; note Ps 37:11, 29; Is 60:21; Rom 4:13; 2 Pt 3:13), but they certainly exclude human frailty, for God’s inheritance is imperishable (1 Cor 15:50). In short, our heritage is nothing less than full salvation (Heb 1:14; 11:7), which God carefully guards for us in heaven (1 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\n<p>Doubtless, the most significant feature in the NT is its emphasis that, as a result of the work of Christ, his people begin even <em>now<\/em> to receive the promised inheritance. The Gospel of John frequently stresses the present reality of eternal life, as does the Letter to the Hebrews (cf. 6:12-17 with 9:15 and 11:13, 39-40).<\/p>\n<p>Paul treats this whole matter thoroughly in Galatians 3:7–4:7. In response to the Judaizers, who claim that the Abrahamic inheritance is restricted to those who become Jews through circumcision, Paul argues vigorously that Abraham’s true children are those who believe, whether Jew or Gentile (3:7; see Acts 26:16-18; Eph 3:6). They become heirs of God’s promise, for they receive the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The principle of inheritance is promise, not the Law (v 18). Those who believe are brought into union with Christ (vv 27-29); but then they are not merely Abraham’s children but God’s (v 26), for Christ is the Son of God and God has determined to send the Spirit of his Son to believers so that they too may call God <em>Father<\/em> (Gal 4:4-7; see also Rom 8:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Indeed, Christ himself as the Son is the true heir (Mt 21:38; Mk 12:7; Lk 20:14); he has inherited a name above every name (Phil 2:9; Heb 1:4) and has been appointed heir of all things (Heb 1:2; see Ps 2:7-8; Mt 28:18). But by his grace, all who become his through faith are counted joint heirs with him (Rom 8:17).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>With a bold shift in the metaphor, the Scriptures speak of believers as God’s inheritance. In the beautiful “Song of Moses” the author speaks of God as the Israelites’ Father (Dt 32:6), who has taken special interest in their inheritance (v 8). Then we are told why God cares: “For the <span>Lord<\/span>’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance” (Dt 32:9, <span>niv<\/span>). This theme becomes very prominent throughout the OT (e.g., Dt 9:26-29; 1 Kgs 8:51-53; Pss 28:9; 33:12; 74:2; Is 19:25; Jer 10:16; Zec 2:12). Elsewhere, Israel is spoken of as God’s special possession (e.g., Ex 19:5; Dt 7:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 1:14 “the redemption of the possession” refers to the final salvation of believers, who are God’s treasure. Further, “we have obtained an inheritance” (Eph 1:11) may well be translated, “we have been made an inheritance,” that is, been “chosen as God’s portion,” a view supported by verse 18. No more fundamental idea than this can be found in Scripture, and its essence is expressed by the words of the One who sits on the throne: “He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son” (Rv 21:7, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Lv 26:11-12; 2 Sm 7:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adoption; Birthright; Firstborn; Heir.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INHERITANCE Legacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times. Legal and Historical Aspect The Patriarchs We learn something of early-second-millennium BC practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. ...","summary_en":"INHERITANCE Legacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times. Legal and Historical Aspect The Patriarchs We learn something of early-second-millennium BC practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. ...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23673,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Luke","title_en":"Gospel of Luke","content_ro":"<h3>LUKE, G<span>ospel of<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Third book of the NT; also the third of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke).<\/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>Tradition attributes the authorship of the Gospel to the esteemed companion of Paul, Luke the physician (Col 4:14). The Gospel does not identify its author by name, but he is apparently well known in the company of early believers. He had obviously been gathering information for his project for some time. In both Luke and Acts the recipient is identified as Theophilus.<\/p>\n<p>The internal testimony of Acts for Lucan authorship must also be weighed, since there is a close relationship between the two books. In three extensive “we” passages the author reports his presence (Acts 16:10-17; 20:5–21:18; 27:1–28:16). These appear to be excerpts from a travel diary; the last of them places the author in Rome with the apostle Paul. We can, by the process of elimination, virtually establish Luke as the author.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>The dating of Luke is debatable. Some argue for a date after <span>AD<\/span> 70, but this robs Luke 21:20 of its predictive value. Others suggest a date prior to the death of Paul (<span>AD<\/span> 64). The latter would readily account for Acts concluding with his ministry in Rome while in prison.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel may have been written in Rome, but this is by no means certain. Asia Minor and Greece have also been suggested as possibilities. The <em>Monarchian Prologue to Luke<\/em> promotes the latter option, but its reliability is suspect. It was at Rome that Luke could have used the time profitably to put the finishing touches on the third Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Luke wrote to Theophilus. Theophilus (“beloved of God”) is probably not, as some suggest, a generic term for all believers. He was a person apparently unfamiliar with the geography of Palestine, for Luke takes care to detail it from time to time. He has a much better grasp of the Greco-Roman world as a whole, for Luke predictably assumes his reader’s familiarity with it. Luke also avoids terms that might prove puzzling to a gentile reader, such as “hosanna” in connection with Jesus’ triumphant entry into Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>In all probability the third Gospel was composed in Rome while Paul awaited trial, on or before <span>AD<\/span> 64. It was dedicated to the “most excellent Theophilus” (Lk 1:3), as an appropriate custom of the time. He was a prominent Gentile who had become a believer. Luke wanted to instruct him (and others) more carefully in the faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Jesus lived out his life within an area roughly 50 miles (80.5 kilometers) wide and 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) long, from Dan in the north to Beersheba in the south. Apart from Jerusalem, the places he is reported to have visited are not important to the secular history of the region. He was raised in the humble village of Nazareth and lived there until about 30 years of age. Capernaum became the center for his Galilean ministry. He passed through Samaria on occasion, and he ministered in Perea. He was betrayed and crucified in Jerusalem. He was raised in triumph on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>Luke writes in retrospect. His perspective had shifted during the interim—geographically from Palestine to the Roman Empire, politically from Israel to Rome, socially from Jewish society to pagan, and religiously from the temple to the horizon of Christian mission. It is as if one era were superimposed on the other, so that the significance of the life and ministry of Jesus can be seen for the early church.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>Simeon beautifully expressed the redemptive theme of Luke’s Gospel when he held Jesus in his arms and exclaimed: “I have seen the Savior you have given to all people. He is a light to reveal God to the nations, and he is the glory of your people Israel!” (Lk 2:30-32, <span>nlt<\/span>). He pointed to Jesus as the long-anticipated Savior, the hope of Gentiles and Jews alike.<\/p>\n<p>Luke wove the work of the Holy Spirit into the life and ministry of Jesus. Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit (Lk 1:35); the Spirit descended on him at his baptism (3:22); he was led into the desert by the Spirit to be tempted (4:2); he was anointed by the Spirit for his ministry (v 18). The Spirit is, as it were, in the background with regard to Jesus’ subsequent labors, but the relationship is understood even when it is not repeated.<\/p>\n<p>Luke accented the experience of messianic joy. The angelic host announced Jesus’ birth with the words, “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to all whom God favors” (2:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then, as he was approaching Jerusalem, the multitude that accompanied him began to praise God, saying, “Bless the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in highest heaven!” (19:38, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>All this suggests that the redemptive theme in Luke is complex in character. It points to Jesus as the Christ. It invites the favorable response of Gentiles no less than Jews. It blends in the empowering of the Holy Spirit for Jesus’ ministry and that of his disciples. It emphasizes the joy that accompanies the publication of the gospel. These are simply variations on the one redemptive design of Luke.<\/p>\n<p>Other concerns surface incidentally. Luke’s interest in historical accuracy is one of these. His apologetic burden is another. The critical place he gives to prayer is a third. The list could be extended.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue (1:1-4)<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel begins with a formal prologue. Luke sought to record in orderly fashion what others had handed down as a legacy of faith. He did so in order to establish the historical credentials of the faith and to assure his readers of their validity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Nativity and Childhood of Jesus (1:5–2:52)<\/h5>\n<p>None of the Gospels is a thoroughgoing biography of Jesus. But Luke took a special interest in historical incidents, first with regard to the nativity and childhood narratives. He recounted 10 episodes in all: the annunciation of John the Baptist’s birth as the forerunner of Christ; the announcement of Jesus’ birth to Mary; the visit of Mary to Elizabeth; the birth of John the Baptist; John the Baptist’s time in the wilderness; the birth of Jesus; the visit of the shepherds; the circumcision of Jesus; Jesus’ presentation in the temple; and the visit to the temple as a youth.<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist received considerable attention from the outset. Luke recorded that it was during the reign of Herod (Herod the Great, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) that Zechariah the priest was ministering in the temple. (Twenty-four platoons of priests served in this capacity for two separate weeks out of the year. The privilege of burning incense was determined by casting lots, and once the priest had done so, he was disqualified from repeating the act.) An angel of the Lord appeared to Zechariah as he was about to burn incense, announcing that he and his wife, Elizabeth, would have a son, whose name should be John. He was to live as a Nazirite (see Nm 6:1-4) and prepare the way for the Messiah. When Zechariah was reluctant to believe (he and Elizabeth were of advanced age), the angel struck him dumb until the time of the promised birth.<\/p>\n<p>We next hear of John in connection with Mary’s visit to Elizabeth. The baby leaped within Elizabeth’s womb as she heard Mary’s greeting (Lk 1:41). Luke immediately followed this account with the birth of John the Baptist. Zechariah named the child as he had been directed, received back his speech, and proceeded to prophesy concerning the coming Messiah and the preparatory role his son would play. The child grew and became “strong in spirit,” abiding in the wilderness until his public ministry began.<\/p>\n<p>Luke told the nativity story from the perspective of Mary. The angel Gabriel visited her and announced that she would give birth to the Messiah (1:26-38). She would conceive miraculously by the Holy Spirit. Mary is portrayed as being devoutly submissive to the purposes of God.<\/p>\n<p>The birth is said to have taken place when Quirinius was governor of Syria, and persons had to travel to their ancestral towns to register for a census. Mary gave birth in a Bethlehem stable. Angels announced the birth to shepherds, who left their flocks to observe the child. Mary treasured these events and continued to ponder their significance.<\/p>\n<p>After Mary had observed her 40 days of ritual purification, she went with Joseph to the temple to present Jesus to the Lord (2:21-40). There Simeon and Anna, two elderly and devout persons, recognized the infant as the promised Messiah. Simeon concluded that Jesus would cause many in Israel to fall and rise, and would bring deep sorrow to the heart of Mary.<\/p>\n<p>The nativity and childhood narratives close with Jesus’ visit to the temple at age 12 to celebrate the Feast of the Passover. Joseph and Mary left Jesus behind in the temple, supposing that he was among relatives or friends. They retraced their steps and found him in the temple conversing with the rabbis—listening to them and amazing them with his own understanding. Luke concluded by saying that “Jesus grew both in height and in wisdom, and he was loved by God and by all who knew him” (2:52, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Beginning of the Public Ministry (3:1–4:30)<\/h5>\n<p>Luke then recorded those events related to the inauguration of Jesus’ ministry. These include the ministry of John the Baptist, the baptism of Jesus, his genealogy, his temptation, and the public announcement in Nazareth. Luke dated the beginning of John the Baptist’s ministry in no fewer than six ways: with the terms of office of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate, Herod Antipas, Philip, Lysanias, and Annas and Caiaphas. John came preaching a baptism of repentance in preparation for the coming of the Messiah. Multitudes came out into the wilderness to hear him and to be baptized by him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also came to be baptized. (Luke does not record John’s protest that Jesus ought rather to baptize him, or Jesus’ insistence that it had to be done—apparently to identify with the people and anticipate his vicarious death on their behalf.) The baptism marked Jesus’ entry into public ministry. Luke inserted what may be the genealogical record through Mary, consistent with his earlier efforts to narrate the events from her perspective.<\/p>\n<p>The temptation of Jesus was a probationary test of his messianic ministry. The introduction to two of the temptations, “If you are the Son of God,” was calculated to make him doubt the words heard at his baptism, “You are my Son” (3:22; 4:3, 9). Satan hoped to persuade Jesus to seek to fulfill his calling and yet avoid the cross. Each time Jesus parried the temptation with a quotation from Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus returned to Galilee and to the synagogue in Nazareth. Here he announced his public ministry in words borrowed from the jubilee observance and associated with the messianic age (4:18-19; cf. Is 61:1-2). They reflected both the religious focus and broad social implications of the ministry to come. The announcement especially held out hope to those who were downtrodden and ostracized by society. When those in attendance challenged his credentials, Jesus replied, “No prophet is accepted in his own hometown” (Lk 4:24). And when they would have cast him from the brow of a hill, he passed through their midst and went on his way.<\/p>\n<h5>The Galilean Ministry (4:31–9:50)<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus moved the center of his activity to Capernaum. Luke records a variety of episodes associated with the Galilean ministry that follows. Approximately 30 instances are mentioned. About a third involve some extraordinary occurrence, such as healing, exorcism, raising from the dead, or feeding a multitude. These were events associated with the messianic age.<\/p>\n<p>However, it was Jesus’ teaching that first seems to have caught the people’s attention. He did not teach as the rabbis, by drawing upon traditional precedent, but he taught in the authority of his messianic office. Luke interlaced his narrative with a considerable amount of Jesus’ teaching. There is a fairly extended section on the observance of the Sabbath (6:1-11). But it is less prominent than Jesus’ sermon “on the plain,” with its extended comments concerning blessings and woes, love for enemies, judging others, knowing one by his fruit, and wise and foolish builders (6:12-49). Jesus taught by way of parables, and Luke recorded those of the sower and lamp (8:1-18). In the former instance, the seed represents the word of God, and the soil the varying preparation to receive the Word. Thereby the disciples might better understand the mixed results of Jesus’ ministry and their own. Others would be perplexed by the parables.<\/p>\n<p>Luke described the calling of select disciples. He mentioned Peter, James, and John, and at a later point Levi (5:1-11, 27-32). The former were called from their fishing boats and the latter from his tax booth. All were summoned to follow Christ in his messianic ministry through the Galilean countryside. Later on, when there were 12 disciples, Jesus sent them out to preach the kingdom and heal the sick (9:1-11). No doubt many contributed to the extended ministry. Luke recorded certain women who traveled with them and “were contributing from their own resources to support Jesus and his disciples” (8:3, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One senses a rising tide of enthusiasm with regard to the Galilean enterprise. It begins with Jesus alone, working in obscurity; it terminates with a faithful band of followers, multitudes hanging on his words, and his name circulated throughout the region. The section peaks with Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ and the transfiguration of Jesus (9:10-36). The presence of Moses and Elijah represents the Law and Prophets as subordinate to the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The scene shifts abruptly to the foot of the mount, where the disciples have been ineffective in delivering a demon-possessed boy. Here Jesus pointed out the need for spiritual resources to accomplish kingdom needs, and thereafter (in response to the disciples’ argument over who would be greatest) an appeal to humility.<\/p>\n<h5>The Journey toward Jerusalem (9:51–19:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Luke next reported Jesus’ ministry on the way to Jerusalem. This has sometimes been called the Perean ministry, assuming that much of it took place across the Jordan in the district of Perea. It has also been graphically described as “the road to the cross.” The number of incidents are roughly the same as those in the preceding section, although the text is about 25 percent longer.<\/p>\n<p>Opposition is seen building at the outset. Jesus sent messengers ahead to prepare for his arrival at a Samaritan village. But the inhabitants would not welcome him, because he was on the way to Jerusalem. There was bad blood between the Jews and Samaritans. The latter had been settled in the land during the Assyrian occupation and brought with them foreign religious and social customs, resulting in a syncretism repugnant to the Jews. Certain disciples asked if Jesus would have them bring down fire from heaven on the village, but Jesus rebuked them. He evidenced a more conciliatory spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Luke reintroduced the Samaritans in connection with a story Jesus tells (10:25-37). It seems that a man was attacked by thieves, who left him for dead. First a priest and then a Levite came along, each walking by on the opposite side of the road. Another passed that way and took pity on the injured stranger. He bound up his wounds and brought him to an inn where he could be cared for at the expense of his benefactor. Jesus added the detail that the man who stopped to help was a Samaritan. He alone understood that a neighbor is the one we befriend rather than the one who befriends us. (The Samaritans reappear once more in the account of 10 lepers who were healed, of whom only a Samaritan returned to give thanks—17:11-19.)<\/p>\n<p>The story of the good Samaritan suggests the opposition Jesus was encountering from the religious establishment centered in Jerusalem. Even as the crowds increased, Jesus observed: “The queen of Sheba will rise up against this generation on judgment day and condemn it, because she came from a distant land to hear the wisdom of Solomon. And now someone greater than Solomon is here—and you refuse to listen to him” (11:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). So also will the men of Nineveh stand to condemn the present generation, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now one greater than Jonah is here.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus reserved the severest rebuke for those Pharisees who had come to contest his every move. Jesus and the Pharisees traveled in much the same circles. Some had been sympathetic to his message, but these seem to have been in the minority. Jesus pictured the Pharisees as meticulous legalists (11:37-44). Events were building to a climax. Jesus had prophesied his impending death and subsequent resurrection. His face was set toward Jerusalem. When some solicitous Pharisees warned him of Herod Antipas’s plan to have him killed, he refused to be intimidated (13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p>Parables abound in this section of the Gospel. They include those of the Good Samaritan, mustard seed, yeast, narrow door, invitation to a marriage feast, great banquet, tower builder, king who goes to war, lost sheep, lost coin, Prodigal Son, unjust steward, rich man and Lazarus, Pharisee and publican, and ten minas. These seem to fall into one of three categories, although perhaps not exclusively so. The one has to do with accepting sinners. (While Scripture reveals that we are all sinners, “sinners” in the synoptic Gospels refers to nonobservant Jews.) A classic instance is the story of the Prodigal Son (15:11-32).<\/p>\n<p>The second category might be called kingdom parables. They suggest that while the kingdom begins in some relatively insignificant fashion, it will expand to incredible proportions. They also warn that not all that seems a part of the growth is a true extension of the kingdom. These emphases can be recognized by comparing the parables of the mustard seed, yeast, and narrow door (13:18-30).<\/p>\n<p>The third category deals with stewardship. Jesus told one such parable as they neared Jerusalem (19:11-27). It involved a man of noble birth who went to a far country, leaving his servants with ten minas each (a mina was about a three-month wage for laborers). They were to invest the minas so that the man would have a good profit when he came back. Upon returning, the nobleman called his servants to get an accounting from them. Those who were found faithful in lesser things were given greater opportunity, but one who failed lost even that which he had been given.<\/p>\n<p>There are some especially touching scenes in the Gospel narrative. One shows Jesus welcoming little children (18:15-17). Another describes a rich ruler who inquired of Jesus how he might obtain eternal life (vv 18-30). Still another episode concerns a tax collector called Zacchaeus (19:1-10). These help us to gain a better appreciation of Jesus’ diversified ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Slowly but surely Jesus had worked his way to Jerusalem. He had met increasing opposition. The cross was just over the horizon. He ministered while time allowed.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death and Resurrection (19:28–24:53)<\/h5>\n<p>Luke concluded his account with the Passion week. First is the Triumphal Entry of Christ (19:28-44). As those with Jesus came over the crest of the Mt of Olives, they began to praise God for all the miracles they had seen: “Bless the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in highest heaven!” (19:38, <span>nlt<\/span>). The jubilation of the multitude stands in sharp contrast to Jesus’ weeping over an unrepentant city and lamenting the destruction to be visited upon it.<\/p>\n<p>Entering the temple area, Jesus began driving out those who were selling goods there. God’s house should be a house of prayer, but—Jesus protests—they have made it a den of robbers. He continued to teach daily in the temple precincts, while the religious leaders plotted how to put him to death without inciting the anger of the people.<\/p>\n<p>Luke recorded some of the interchange with the leaders and people (chs 20–21). This includes a challenge to Jesus’ authority, the parable of the wicked tenants, the question about paying taxes to Caesar, another question concerning the resurrection, Jesus’ question about how to understand the Messiah’s Davidic ancestry and lordship, warning against the scribes, comments on the widow’s offering, and discourse on the end of the age. This broad range of topics is related to the messianic disputation in progress.<\/p>\n<p>The problem as Luke represents it seems less an intellectual than a moral one. The religious establishment was determined to retain its privileged position at all costs. This Galilean rabbi was a serious threat that had to be eliminated. It was only a matter of waiting for the right opportunity. It appeared when Judas Iscariot offered to betray Jesus (22:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The Last Supper and the prayer vigil in Gethsemane intervene between the plot of the leaders and the arrest of Jesus (22:7-46). From the upper room Jesus and the disciples made their way across the Kidron Valley to the Mt of Olives. Here Jesus prayed in preparation for the crucifixion to follow. The disciples slept, being weary from the heavy demands of those days. Soon Judas appeared to point Jesus out, and the soldiers rushed him away to stand before the high priest. Peter denied Christ, fearing for his own life. Jesus was condemned by the Sanhedrin. (Commentators debate whether this was a formal session of the council of Jewish elders.) He was sent to the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, then to Herod Antipas, and back again to Pilate. Pilate saw no reason for putting Jesus to death, but the multitude was stirred up by the Jewish leaders to demand his crucifixion. Pilate yielded to their pressure when alternatives seemed to escape him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was led away to be crucified. Luke alone mentioned those who mourned him (23:27). Jesus warned them rather to mourn for themselves and their children. Here and hereafter we see Jesus’ concern for others in the midst of his own agony: those crucifying him, the repentant criminal, and his mother, Mary.<\/p>\n<p>Luke records a mixed response to the crucifixion. The people stood watching, as if immobilized by the rush of events. They may have felt helpless to intervene even if disposed to do so. Some of the religious leaders went so far as to mock Jesus; “He saved others, . . . let him save himself if he is really God’s Chosen One, the Messiah” (23:35, <span>nlt<\/span>). One hardened criminal joined in their derision; the other asked for clemency.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness shrouded the scene. The curtain of the temple was torn, as if to suggest that access was being made available through the shed blood of Christ. Jesus commended his spirit to the Father. He breathed his last. His body was laid in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea. Women went to prepare spices and perfumes for the interment, but they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment.<\/p>\n<p>Early on the first day of the week the women approached the tomb, only to find the stone guarding its entrance rolled away and the body of Jesus missing. Suddenly two figures in gleaming array stood by them. They announced to the frightened women: “He isn’t here! He has risen from the dead!” (24:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). The women returned to report to the apostles. Peter ran to confirm their findings. He discovered the strips of linen laid out as they had been, but with the body absent. He wondered what had happened.<\/p>\n<p>The same day two disciples were going to a village called Emmaus. They were discussing what had happened in Jerusalem when Jesus joined them. They were kept from recognizing him until later on when he broke bread with them. They hurriedly returned to Jerusalem to reassure the fellowship that it was true that the Lord was risen.<\/p>\n<p>While they were still talking, Jesus appeared in their midst. “Look at my hands. Look at my feet. You can see that it’s really me. Touch me and make sure that I am not a ghost, because ghosts don’t have bodies, as you see that I do!” (24:39, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then he helped them understand the implications of what had happened: “Yes, it was written long ago that the Messiah must suffer and die and rise again from the dead on the third day. With my authority, take this message of repentance to all the nations, beginning in Jerusalem: ‘There is forgiveness of sins for all who turn to me.’ You are witnesses of all these things. And now I will send the Holy Spirit, just as my Father promised. But stay here in the city until the Holy Spirit comes and fills you with power from heaven” (vv 46-49, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Luke concludes his Gospel with an account of the ascension (24:50-53). It was as Jesus blessed them that he was lifted up before their eyes. They worshiped him as the ascended Lord and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. There they remained in the temple precinct, praising God and anticipating the coming of the Holy Spirit to empower them for witnessing to all the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LUKE, G<span>ospel of<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Third book of the NT; also the third of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke).<\/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>Tradition attributes the authorship of the Gospel to the esteemed companion of Paul, Luke the physician (Col 4:14). The Gospel does not identify its author by name, but he is apparently well known in the company of early believers. He had obviously been gathering information for his project for some time. In both Luke and Acts the recipient is identified as Theophilus.<\/p>\n<p>The internal testimony of Acts for Lucan authorship must also be weighed, since there is a close relationship between the two books. In three extensive “we” passages the author reports his presence (Acts 16:10-17; 20:5–21:18; 27:1–28:16). These appear to be excerpts from a travel diary; the last of them places the author in Rome with the apostle Paul. We can, by the process of elimination, virtually establish Luke as the author.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>The dating of Luke is debatable. Some argue for a date after <span>AD<\/span> 70, but this robs Luke 21:20 of its predictive value. Others suggest a date prior to the death of Paul (<span>AD<\/span> 64). The latter would readily account for Acts concluding with his ministry in Rome while in prison.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel may have been written in Rome, but this is by no means certain. Asia Minor and Greece have also been suggested as possibilities. The <em>Monarchian Prologue to Luke<\/em> promotes the latter option, but its reliability is suspect. It was at Rome that Luke could have used the time profitably to put the finishing touches on the third Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Luke wrote to Theophilus. Theophilus (“beloved of God”) is probably not, as some suggest, a generic term for all believers. He was a person apparently unfamiliar with the geography of Palestine, for Luke takes care to detail it from time to time. He has a much better grasp of the Greco-Roman world as a whole, for Luke predictably assumes his reader’s familiarity with it. Luke also avoids terms that might prove puzzling to a gentile reader, such as “hosanna” in connection with Jesus’ triumphant entry into Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>In all probability the third Gospel was composed in Rome while Paul awaited trial, on or before <span>AD<\/span> 64. It was dedicated to the “most excellent Theophilus” (Lk 1:3), as an appropriate custom of the time. He was a prominent Gentile who had become a believer. Luke wanted to instruct him (and others) more carefully in the faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Jesus lived out his life within an area roughly 50 miles (80.5 kilometers) wide and 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) long, from Dan in the north to Beersheba in the south. Apart from Jerusalem, the places he is reported to have visited are not important to the secular history of the region. He was raised in the humble village of Nazareth and lived there until about 30 years of age. Capernaum became the center for his Galilean ministry. He passed through Samaria on occasion, and he ministered in Perea. He was betrayed and crucified in Jerusalem. He was raised in triumph on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>Luke writes in retrospect. His perspective had shifted during the interim—geographically from Palestine to the Roman Empire, politically from Israel to Rome, socially from Jewish society to pagan, and religiously from the temple to the horizon of Christian mission. It is as if one era were superimposed on the other, so that the significance of the life and ministry of Jesus can be seen for the early church.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>Simeon beautifully expressed the redemptive theme of Luke’s Gospel when he held Jesus in his arms and exclaimed: “I have seen the Savior you have given to all people. He is a light to reveal God to the nations, and he is the glory of your people Israel!” (Lk 2:30-32, <span>nlt<\/span>). He pointed to Jesus as the long-anticipated Savior, the hope of Gentiles and Jews alike.<\/p>\n<p>Luke wove the work of the Holy Spirit into the life and ministry of Jesus. Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit (Lk 1:35); the Spirit descended on him at his baptism (3:22); he was led into the desert by the Spirit to be tempted (4:2); he was anointed by the Spirit for his ministry (v 18). The Spirit is, as it were, in the background with regard to Jesus’ subsequent labors, but the relationship is understood even when it is not repeated.<\/p>\n<p>Luke accented the experience of messianic joy. The angelic host announced Jesus’ birth with the words, “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to all whom God favors” (2:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then, as he was approaching Jerusalem, the multitude that accompanied him began to praise God, saying, “Bless the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in highest heaven!” (19:38, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>All this suggests that the redemptive theme in Luke is complex in character. It points to Jesus as the Christ. It invites the favorable response of Gentiles no less than Jews. It blends in the empowering of the Holy Spirit for Jesus’ ministry and that of his disciples. It emphasizes the joy that accompanies the publication of the gospel. These are simply variations on the one redemptive design of Luke.<\/p>\n<p>Other concerns surface incidentally. Luke’s interest in historical accuracy is one of these. His apologetic burden is another. The critical place he gives to prayer is a third. The list could be extended.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue (1:1-4)<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel begins with a formal prologue. Luke sought to record in orderly fashion what others had handed down as a legacy of faith. He did so in order to establish the historical credentials of the faith and to assure his readers of their validity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Nativity and Childhood of Jesus (1:5–2:52)<\/h5>\n<p>None of the Gospels is a thoroughgoing biography of Jesus. But Luke took a special interest in historical incidents, first with regard to the nativity and childhood narratives. He recounted 10 episodes in all: the annunciation of John the Baptist’s birth as the forerunner of Christ; the announcement of Jesus’ birth to Mary; the visit of Mary to Elizabeth; the birth of John the Baptist; John the Baptist’s time in the wilderness; the birth of Jesus; the visit of the shepherds; the circumcision of Jesus; Jesus’ presentation in the temple; and the visit to the temple as a youth.<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist received considerable attention from the outset. Luke recorded that it was during the reign of Herod (Herod the Great, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) that Zechariah the priest was ministering in the temple. (Twenty-four platoons of priests served in this capacity for two separate weeks out of the year. The privilege of burning incense was determined by casting lots, and once the priest had done so, he was disqualified from repeating the act.) An angel of the Lord appeared to Zechariah as he was about to burn incense, announcing that he and his wife, Elizabeth, would have a son, whose name should be John. He was to live as a Nazirite (see Nm 6:1-4) and prepare the way for the Messiah. When Zechariah was reluctant to believe (he and Elizabeth were of advanced age), the angel struck him dumb until the time of the promised birth.<\/p>\n<p>We next hear of John in connection with Mary’s visit to Elizabeth. The baby leaped within Elizabeth’s womb as she heard Mary’s greeting (Lk 1:41). Luke immediately followed this account with the birth of John the Baptist. Zechariah named the child as he had been directed, received back his speech, and proceeded to prophesy concerning the coming Messiah and the preparatory role his son would play. The child grew and became “strong in spirit,” abiding in the wilderness until his public ministry began.<\/p>\n<p>Luke told the nativity story from the perspective of Mary. The angel Gabriel visited her and announced that she would give birth to the Messiah (1:26-38). She would conceive miraculously by the Holy Spirit. Mary is portrayed as being devoutly submissive to the purposes of God.<\/p>\n<p>The birth is said to have taken place when Quirinius was governor of Syria, and persons had to travel to their ancestral towns to register for a census. Mary gave birth in a Bethlehem stable. Angels announced the birth to shepherds, who left their flocks to observe the child. Mary treasured these events and continued to ponder their significance.<\/p>\n<p>After Mary had observed her 40 days of ritual purification, she went with Joseph to the temple to present Jesus to the Lord (2:21-40). There Simeon and Anna, two elderly and devout persons, recognized the infant as the promised Messiah. Simeon concluded that Jesus would cause many in Israel to fall and rise, and would bring deep sorrow to the heart of Mary.<\/p>\n<p>The nativity and childhood narratives close with Jesus’ visit to the temple at age 12 to celebrate the Feast of the Passover. Joseph and Mary left Jesus behind in the temple, supposing that he was among relatives or friends. They retraced their steps and found him in the temple conversing with the rabbis—listening to them and amazing them with his own understanding. Luke concluded by saying that “Jesus grew both in height and in wisdom, and he was loved by God and by all who knew him” (2:52, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Beginning of the Public Ministry (3:1–4:30)<\/h5>\n<p>Luke then recorded those events related to the inauguration of Jesus’ ministry. These include the ministry of John the Baptist, the baptism of Jesus, his genealogy, his temptation, and the public announcement in Nazareth. Luke dated the beginning of John the Baptist’s ministry in no fewer than six ways: with the terms of office of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate, Herod Antipas, Philip, Lysanias, and Annas and Caiaphas. John came preaching a baptism of repentance in preparation for the coming of the Messiah. Multitudes came out into the wilderness to hear him and to be baptized by him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also came to be baptized. (Luke does not record John’s protest that Jesus ought rather to baptize him, or Jesus’ insistence that it had to be done—apparently to identify with the people and anticipate his vicarious death on their behalf.) The baptism marked Jesus’ entry into public ministry. Luke inserted what may be the genealogical record through Mary, consistent with his earlier efforts to narrate the events from her perspective.<\/p>\n<p>The temptation of Jesus was a probationary test of his messianic ministry. The introduction to two of the temptations, “If you are the Son of God,” was calculated to make him doubt the words heard at his baptism, “You are my Son” (3:22; 4:3, 9). Satan hoped to persuade Jesus to seek to fulfill his calling and yet avoid the cross. Each time Jesus parried the temptation with a quotation from Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus returned to Galilee and to the synagogue in Nazareth. Here he announced his public ministry in words borrowed from the jubilee observance and associated with the messianic age (4:18-19; cf. Is 61:1-2). They reflected both the religious focus and broad social implications of the ministry to come. The announcement especially held out hope to those who were downtrodden and ostracized by society. When those in attendance challenged his credentials, Jesus replied, “No prophet is accepted in his own hometown” (Lk 4:24). And when they would have cast him from the brow of a hill, he passed through their midst and went on his way.<\/p>\n<h5>The Galilean Ministry (4:31–9:50)<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus moved the center of his activity to Capernaum. Luke records a variety of episodes associated with the Galilean ministry that follows. Approximately 30 instances are mentioned. About a third involve some extraordinary occurrence, such as healing, exorcism, raising from the dead, or feeding a multitude. These were events associated with the messianic age.<\/p>\n<p>However, it was Jesus’ teaching that first seems to have caught the people’s attention. He did not teach as the rabbis, by drawing upon traditional precedent, but he taught in the authority of his messianic office. Luke interlaced his narrative with a considerable amount of Jesus’ teaching. There is a fairly extended section on the observance of the Sabbath (6:1-11). But it is less prominent than Jesus’ sermon “on the plain,” with its extended comments concerning blessings and woes, love for enemies, judging others, knowing one by his fruit, and wise and foolish builders (6:12-49). Jesus taught by way of parables, and Luke recorded those of the sower and lamp (8:1-18). In the former instance, the seed represents the word of God, and the soil the varying preparation to receive the Word. Thereby the disciples might better understand the mixed results of Jesus’ ministry and their own. Others would be perplexed by the parables.<\/p>\n<p>Luke described the calling of select disciples. He mentioned Peter, James, and John, and at a later point Levi (5:1-11, 27-32). The former were called from their fishing boats and the latter from his tax booth. All were summoned to follow Christ in his messianic ministry through the Galilean countryside. Later on, when there were 12 disciples, Jesus sent them out to preach the kingdom and heal the sick (9:1-11). No doubt many contributed to the extended ministry. Luke recorded certain women who traveled with them and “were contributing from their own resources to support Jesus and his disciples” (8:3, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One senses a rising tide of enthusiasm with regard to the Galilean enterprise. It begins with Jesus alone, working in obscurity; it terminates with a faithful band of followers, multitudes hanging on his words, and his name circulated throughout the region. The section peaks with Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ and the transfiguration of Jesus (9:10-36). The presence of Moses and Elijah represents the Law and Prophets as subordinate to the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The scene shifts abruptly to the foot of the mount, where the disciples have been ineffective in delivering a demon-possessed boy. Here Jesus pointed out the need for spiritual resources to accomplish kingdom needs, and thereafter (in response to the disciples’ argument over who would be greatest) an appeal to humility.<\/p>\n<h5>The Journey toward Jerusalem (9:51–19:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Luke next reported Jesus’ ministry on the way to Jerusalem. This has sometimes been called the Perean ministry, assuming that much of it took place across the Jordan in the district of Perea. It has also been graphically described as “the road to the cross.” The number of incidents are roughly the same as those in the preceding section, although the text is about 25 percent longer.<\/p>\n<p>Opposition is seen building at the outset. Jesus sent messengers ahead to prepare for his arrival at a Samaritan village. But the inhabitants would not welcome him, because he was on the way to Jerusalem. There was bad blood between the Jews and Samaritans. The latter had been settled in the land during the Assyrian occupation and brought with them foreign religious and social customs, resulting in a syncretism repugnant to the Jews. Certain disciples asked if Jesus would have them bring down fire from heaven on the village, but Jesus rebuked them. He evidenced a more conciliatory spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Luke reintroduced the Samaritans in connection with a story Jesus tells (10:25-37). It seems that a man was attacked by thieves, who left him for dead. First a priest and then a Levite came along, each walking by on the opposite side of the road. Another passed that way and took pity on the injured stranger. He bound up his wounds and brought him to an inn where he could be cared for at the expense of his benefactor. Jesus added the detail that the man who stopped to help was a Samaritan. He alone understood that a neighbor is the one we befriend rather than the one who befriends us. (The Samaritans reappear once more in the account of 10 lepers who were healed, of whom only a Samaritan returned to give thanks—17:11-19.)<\/p>\n<p>The story of the good Samaritan suggests the opposition Jesus was encountering from the religious establishment centered in Jerusalem. Even as the crowds increased, Jesus observed: “The queen of Sheba will rise up against this generation on judgment day and condemn it, because she came from a distant land to hear the wisdom of Solomon. And now someone greater than Solomon is here—and you refuse to listen to him” (11:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). So also will the men of Nineveh stand to condemn the present generation, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now one greater than Jonah is here.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus reserved the severest rebuke for those Pharisees who had come to contest his every move. Jesus and the Pharisees traveled in much the same circles. Some had been sympathetic to his message, but these seem to have been in the minority. Jesus pictured the Pharisees as meticulous legalists (11:37-44). Events were building to a climax. Jesus had prophesied his impending death and subsequent resurrection. His face was set toward Jerusalem. When some solicitous Pharisees warned him of Herod Antipas’s plan to have him killed, he refused to be intimidated (13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p>Parables abound in this section of the Gospel. They include those of the Good Samaritan, mustard seed, yeast, narrow door, invitation to a marriage feast, great banquet, tower builder, king who goes to war, lost sheep, lost coin, Prodigal Son, unjust steward, rich man and Lazarus, Pharisee and publican, and ten minas. These seem to fall into one of three categories, although perhaps not exclusively so. The one has to do with accepting sinners. (While Scripture reveals that we are all sinners, “sinners” in the synoptic Gospels refers to nonobservant Jews.) A classic instance is the story of the Prodigal Son (15:11-32).<\/p>\n<p>The second category might be called kingdom parables. They suggest that while the kingdom begins in some relatively insignificant fashion, it will expand to incredible proportions. They also warn that not all that seems a part of the growth is a true extension of the kingdom. These emphases can be recognized by comparing the parables of the mustard seed, yeast, and narrow door (13:18-30).<\/p>\n<p>The third category deals with stewardship. Jesus told one such parable as they neared Jerusalem (19:11-27). It involved a man of noble birth who went to a far country, leaving his servants with ten minas each (a mina was about a three-month wage for laborers). They were to invest the minas so that the man would have a good profit when he came back. Upon returning, the nobleman called his servants to get an accounting from them. Those who were found faithful in lesser things were given greater opportunity, but one who failed lost even that which he had been given.<\/p>\n<p>There are some especially touching scenes in the Gospel narrative. One shows Jesus welcoming little children (18:15-17). Another describes a rich ruler who inquired of Jesus how he might obtain eternal life (vv 18-30). Still another episode concerns a tax collector called Zacchaeus (19:1-10). These help us to gain a better appreciation of Jesus’ diversified ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Slowly but surely Jesus had worked his way to Jerusalem. He had met increasing opposition. The cross was just over the horizon. He ministered while time allowed.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death and Resurrection (19:28–24:53)<\/h5>\n<p>Luke concluded his account with the Passion week. First is the Triumphal Entry of Christ (19:28-44). As those with Jesus came over the crest of the Mt of Olives, they began to praise God for all the miracles they had seen: “Bless the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in highest heaven!” (19:38, <span>nlt<\/span>). The jubilation of the multitude stands in sharp contrast to Jesus’ weeping over an unrepentant city and lamenting the destruction to be visited upon it.<\/p>\n<p>Entering the temple area, Jesus began driving out those who were selling goods there. God’s house should be a house of prayer, but—Jesus protests—they have made it a den of robbers. He continued to teach daily in the temple precincts, while the religious leaders plotted how to put him to death without inciting the anger of the people.<\/p>\n<p>Luke recorded some of the interchange with the leaders and people (chs 20–21). This includes a challenge to Jesus’ authority, the parable of the wicked tenants, the question about paying taxes to Caesar, another question concerning the resurrection, Jesus’ question about how to understand the Messiah’s Davidic ancestry and lordship, warning against the scribes, comments on the widow’s offering, and discourse on the end of the age. This broad range of topics is related to the messianic disputation in progress.<\/p>\n<p>The problem as Luke represents it seems less an intellectual than a moral one. The religious establishment was determined to retain its privileged position at all costs. This Galilean rabbi was a serious threat that had to be eliminated. It was only a matter of waiting for the right opportunity. It appeared when Judas Iscariot offered to betray Jesus (22:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The Last Supper and the prayer vigil in Gethsemane intervene between the plot of the leaders and the arrest of Jesus (22:7-46). From the upper room Jesus and the disciples made their way across the Kidron Valley to the Mt of Olives. Here Jesus prayed in preparation for the crucifixion to follow. The disciples slept, being weary from the heavy demands of those days. Soon Judas appeared to point Jesus out, and the soldiers rushed him away to stand before the high priest. Peter denied Christ, fearing for his own life. Jesus was condemned by the Sanhedrin. (Commentators debate whether this was a formal session of the council of Jewish elders.) He was sent to the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, then to Herod Antipas, and back again to Pilate. Pilate saw no reason for putting Jesus to death, but the multitude was stirred up by the Jewish leaders to demand his crucifixion. Pilate yielded to their pressure when alternatives seemed to escape him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was led away to be crucified. Luke alone mentioned those who mourned him (23:27). Jesus warned them rather to mourn for themselves and their children. Here and hereafter we see Jesus’ concern for others in the midst of his own agony: those crucifying him, the repentant criminal, and his mother, Mary.<\/p>\n<p>Luke records a mixed response to the crucifixion. The people stood watching, as if immobilized by the rush of events. They may have felt helpless to intervene even if disposed to do so. Some of the religious leaders went so far as to mock Jesus; “He saved others, . . . let him save himself if he is really God’s Chosen One, the Messiah” (23:35, <span>nlt<\/span>). One hardened criminal joined in their derision; the other asked for clemency.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness shrouded the scene. The curtain of the temple was torn, as if to suggest that access was being made available through the shed blood of Christ. Jesus commended his spirit to the Father. He breathed his last. His body was laid in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea. Women went to prepare spices and perfumes for the interment, but they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment.<\/p>\n<p>Early on the first day of the week the women approached the tomb, only to find the stone guarding its entrance rolled away and the body of Jesus missing. Suddenly two figures in gleaming array stood by them. They announced to the frightened women: “He isn’t here! He has risen from the dead!” (24:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). The women returned to report to the apostles. Peter ran to confirm their findings. He discovered the strips of linen laid out as they had been, but with the body absent. He wondered what had happened.<\/p>\n<p>The same day two disciples were going to a village called Emmaus. They were discussing what had happened in Jerusalem when Jesus joined them. They were kept from recognizing him until later on when he broke bread with them. They hurriedly returned to Jerusalem to reassure the fellowship that it was true that the Lord was risen.<\/p>\n<p>While they were still talking, Jesus appeared in their midst. “Look at my hands. Look at my feet. You can see that it’s really me. Touch me and make sure that I am not a ghost, because ghosts don’t have bodies, as you see that I do!” (24:39, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then he helped them understand the implications of what had happened: “Yes, it was written long ago that the Messiah must suffer and die and rise again from the dead on the third day. With my authority, take this message of repentance to all the nations, beginning in Jerusalem: ‘There is forgiveness of sins for all who turn to me.’ You are witnesses of all these things. And now I will send the Holy Spirit, just as my Father promised. But stay here in the city until the Holy Spirit comes and fills you with power from heaven” (vv 46-49, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Luke concludes his Gospel with an account of the ascension (24:50-53). It was as Jesus blessed them that he was lifted up before their eyes. They worshiped him as the ascended Lord and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. There they remained in the temple precinct, praising God and anticipating the coming of the Holy Spirit to empower them for witnessing to all the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LUKE, Gospel of Third book of the NT; also the third of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke). Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author Tradition attributes the authorship of the Gospel to the esteemed companion of Paul, Luke the physician (Col 4:14). The Gospel does not identify its author by name, but he is apparently well known in the company of early believers. He had obviously been gathering information for his...","summary_en":"LUKE, Gospel of Third book of the NT; also the third of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke). Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author Tradition attributes the authorship of the Gospel to the esteemed companion of Paul, Luke the physician (Col 4:14). The Gospel does not identify its author by name, but he is apparently well known in the company of early believers. He had obviously been gathering information for his...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27292,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Neighbor","title_en":"Neighbor","content_ro":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","summary_en":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55889,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:25","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> <em>an expert in religious law:<\/em> See study note on 5:17.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> <em>an expert in religious law:<\/em> See study note on 5:17.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:25 an expert in religious law: See study note on 5:17.","summary_en":"10:25 an expert in religious law: See study note on 5:17.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83515,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:25","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> <em>an expert in religious law:<\/em> See study note on 5:17.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> <em>an expert in religious law:<\/em> See study note on 5:17.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:25 an expert in religious law: See study note on 5:17.","summary_en":"10:25 an expert in religious law: See study note on 5:17.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111141,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:25","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> <em>an expert in religious law:<\/em> See study note on 5:17.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> <em>an expert in religious law:<\/em> See study note on 5:17.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:25 an expert in religious law: See study note on 5:17.","summary_en":"10:25 an expert in religious law: See study note on 5:17.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138767,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:25","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> <em>an expert in religious law:<\/em> See study note on 5:17.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> <em>an expert in religious law:<\/em> See study note on 5:17.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:25 an expert in religious law: See study note on 5:17.","summary_en":"10:25 an expert in religious law: See study note on 5:17.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61699,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Success","title_en":"True Success","content_ro":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\n<p>God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\n<p>Beginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\n<p>While the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\n<p>God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\n<p>Beginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\n<p>While the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","summary_en":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64633,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Social Justice","title_en":"Social Justice","content_ro":"<h3>Social Justice<\/h3>\n<p>In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s <span>BC<\/span>). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s <span>BC<\/span> (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue.<\/p>\n<p>Amos was appalled by Israel’s abuse of the powerless (Amos 2:6-8; 3:10). Unlike the surrounding nations, Israel had known God in a uniquely personal and intimate manner and then turned away from him (2:9-12; 3:1-2). The people of Israel had refused to worship God appropriately and had oppressed the powerless, so God would hold them accountable and meet them in judgment (4:12), not mercy. God wants justice to flow like a mighty river (Amos 5:24). Those who oppose it will be swept away.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of social justice is also made clear in the New Testament. Jesus drew a connection between proper worship and the practice of social justice, warning of the judgment that is coming upon those who do not express their faith in loving action toward others (see Matt 25:31-46). Right understanding must be matched by right practice, which serves as evidence of one’s faith (see Luke 10:25-37; John 13:35). Jesus’ followers recoginzed the significant role social justice needed to play within the early Christian communities (see Acts 2:44-45; Gal 2:9-10; 1 Tim 5:3-16; Jas 1:27–2:26; 1 Jn 3:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>God’s compassion for the oppressed is evidenced throughout Scripture. As followers of Christ, we must not neglect those who are in need, and like the prophets, we must confront injustice wherever it is encountered.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 23:1-12; Lev 19:9-18; Deut 10:17-20; 16:18-20; 24:10-22; 1 Kgs 21:1-24; 2 Chr 19:4-11; Pss 94:20-23; 146:3-9; Prov 22:8-9; 31:8-9; Eccl 5:8-9; Isa 1:17; 5:7; 9:6-7; 10:1-2; 42:1-4; 58:4-12; Amos 2:6-8; 5:7-17, 23-24; Matt 12:15-21; 23:23; Luke 10:25-37; Heb 1:8-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Social Justice<\/h3>\n<p>In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s <span>BC<\/span>). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s <span>BC<\/span> (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue.<\/p>\n<p>Amos was appalled by Israel’s abuse of the powerless (Amos 2:6-8; 3:10). Unlike the surrounding nations, Israel had known God in a uniquely personal and intimate manner and then turned away from him (2:9-12; 3:1-2). The people of Israel had refused to worship God appropriately and had oppressed the powerless, so God would hold them accountable and meet them in judgment (4:12), not mercy. God wants justice to flow like a mighty river (Amos 5:24). Those who oppose it will be swept away.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of social justice is also made clear in the New Testament. Jesus drew a connection between proper worship and the practice of social justice, warning of the judgment that is coming upon those who do not express their faith in loving action toward others (see Matt 25:31-46). Right understanding must be matched by right practice, which serves as evidence of one’s faith (see Luke 10:25-37; John 13:35). Jesus’ followers recoginzed the significant role social justice needed to play within the early Christian communities (see Acts 2:44-45; Gal 2:9-10; 1 Tim 5:3-16; Jas 1:27–2:26; 1 Jn 3:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>God’s compassion for the oppressed is evidenced throughout Scripture. As followers of Christ, we must not neglect those who are in need, and like the prophets, we must confront injustice wherever it is encountered.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 23:1-12; Lev 19:9-18; Deut 10:17-20; 16:18-20; 24:10-22; 1 Kgs 21:1-24; 2 Chr 19:4-11; Pss 94:20-23; 146:3-9; Prov 22:8-9; 31:8-9; Eccl 5:8-9; Isa 1:17; 5:7; 9:6-7; 10:1-2; 42:1-4; 58:4-12; Amos 2:6-8; 5:7-17, 23-24; Matt 12:15-21; 23:23; Luke 10:25-37; Heb 1:8-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Social Justice In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s BC). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s BC (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue. Amos was appalled ...","summary_en":"Social Justice In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s BC). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s BC (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue. Amos was appalled ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89325,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Success","title_en":"True Success","content_ro":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\n<p>God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\n<p>Beginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\n<p>While the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\n<p>God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\n<p>Beginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\n<p>While the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","summary_en":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92259,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Social Justice","title_en":"Social Justice","content_ro":"<h3>Social Justice<\/h3>\n<p>In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s <span>BC<\/span>). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s <span>BC<\/span> (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue.<\/p>\n<p>Amos was appalled by Israel’s abuse of the powerless (Amos 2:6-8; 3:10). Unlike the surrounding nations, Israel had known God in a uniquely personal and intimate manner and then turned away from him (2:9-12; 3:1-2). The people of Israel had refused to worship God appropriately and had oppressed the powerless, so God would hold them accountable and meet them in judgment (4:12), not mercy. God wants justice to flow like a mighty river (Amos 5:24). Those who oppose it will be swept away.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of social justice is also made clear in the New Testament. Jesus drew a connection between proper worship and the practice of social justice, warning of the judgment that is coming upon those who do not express their faith in loving action toward others (see Matt 25:31-46). Right understanding must be matched by right practice, which serves as evidence of one’s faith (see Luke 10:25-37; John 13:35). Jesus’ followers recoginzed the significant role social justice needed to play within the early Christian communities (see Acts 2:44-45; Gal 2:9-10; 1 Tim 5:3-16; Jas 1:27–2:26; 1 Jn 3:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>God’s compassion for the oppressed is evidenced throughout Scripture. As followers of Christ, we must not neglect those who are in need, and like the prophets, we must confront injustice wherever it is encountered.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 23:1-12; Lev 19:9-18; Deut 10:17-20; 16:18-20; 24:10-22; 1 Kgs 21:1-24; 2 Chr 19:4-11; Pss 94:20-23; 146:3-9; Prov 22:8-9; 31:8-9; Eccl 5:8-9; Isa 1:17; 5:7; 9:6-7; 10:1-2; 42:1-4; 58:4-12; Amos 2:6-8; 5:7-17, 23-24; Matt 12:15-21; 23:23; Luke 10:25-37; Heb 1:8-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Social Justice<\/h3>\n<p>In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s <span>BC<\/span>). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s <span>BC<\/span> (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue.<\/p>\n<p>Amos was appalled by Israel’s abuse of the powerless (Amos 2:6-8; 3:10). Unlike the surrounding nations, Israel had known God in a uniquely personal and intimate manner and then turned away from him (2:9-12; 3:1-2). The people of Israel had refused to worship God appropriately and had oppressed the powerless, so God would hold them accountable and meet them in judgment (4:12), not mercy. God wants justice to flow like a mighty river (Amos 5:24). Those who oppose it will be swept away.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of social justice is also made clear in the New Testament. Jesus drew a connection between proper worship and the practice of social justice, warning of the judgment that is coming upon those who do not express their faith in loving action toward others (see Matt 25:31-46). Right understanding must be matched by right practice, which serves as evidence of one’s faith (see Luke 10:25-37; John 13:35). Jesus’ followers recoginzed the significant role social justice needed to play within the early Christian communities (see Acts 2:44-45; Gal 2:9-10; 1 Tim 5:3-16; Jas 1:27–2:26; 1 Jn 3:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>God’s compassion for the oppressed is evidenced throughout Scripture. As followers of Christ, we must not neglect those who are in need, and like the prophets, we must confront injustice wherever it is encountered.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 23:1-12; Lev 19:9-18; Deut 10:17-20; 16:18-20; 24:10-22; 1 Kgs 21:1-24; 2 Chr 19:4-11; Pss 94:20-23; 146:3-9; Prov 22:8-9; 31:8-9; Eccl 5:8-9; Isa 1:17; 5:7; 9:6-7; 10:1-2; 42:1-4; 58:4-12; Amos 2:6-8; 5:7-17, 23-24; Matt 12:15-21; 23:23; Luke 10:25-37; Heb 1:8-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Social Justice In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s BC). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s BC (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue. Amos was appalled ...","summary_en":"Social Justice In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s BC). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s BC (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue. Amos was appalled ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116951,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Success","title_en":"True Success","content_ro":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\n<p>God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\n<p>Beginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\n<p>While the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\n<p>God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\n<p>Beginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\n<p>While the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","summary_en":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119885,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Social Justice","title_en":"Social Justice","content_ro":"<h3>Social Justice<\/h3>\n<p>In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s <span>BC<\/span>). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s <span>BC<\/span> (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue.<\/p>\n<p>Amos was appalled by Israel’s abuse of the powerless (Amos 2:6-8; 3:10). Unlike the surrounding nations, Israel had known God in a uniquely personal and intimate manner and then turned away from him (2:9-12; 3:1-2). The people of Israel had refused to worship God appropriately and had oppressed the powerless, so God would hold them accountable and meet them in judgment (4:12), not mercy. God wants justice to flow like a mighty river (Amos 5:24). Those who oppose it will be swept away.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of social justice is also made clear in the New Testament. Jesus drew a connection between proper worship and the practice of social justice, warning of the judgment that is coming upon those who do not express their faith in loving action toward others (see Matt 25:31-46). Right understanding must be matched by right practice, which serves as evidence of one’s faith (see Luke 10:25-37; John 13:35). Jesus’ followers recoginzed the significant role social justice needed to play within the early Christian communities (see Acts 2:44-45; Gal 2:9-10; 1 Tim 5:3-16; Jas 1:27–2:26; 1 Jn 3:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>God’s compassion for the oppressed is evidenced throughout Scripture. As followers of Christ, we must not neglect those who are in need, and like the prophets, we must confront injustice wherever it is encountered.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 23:1-12; Lev 19:9-18; Deut 10:17-20; 16:18-20; 24:10-22; 1 Kgs 21:1-24; 2 Chr 19:4-11; Pss 94:20-23; 146:3-9; Prov 22:8-9; 31:8-9; Eccl 5:8-9; Isa 1:17; 5:7; 9:6-7; 10:1-2; 42:1-4; 58:4-12; Amos 2:6-8; 5:7-17, 23-24; Matt 12:15-21; 23:23; Luke 10:25-37; Heb 1:8-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Social Justice<\/h3>\n<p>In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s <span>BC<\/span>). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s <span>BC<\/span> (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue.<\/p>\n<p>Amos was appalled by Israel’s abuse of the powerless (Amos 2:6-8; 3:10). Unlike the surrounding nations, Israel had known God in a uniquely personal and intimate manner and then turned away from him (2:9-12; 3:1-2). The people of Israel had refused to worship God appropriately and had oppressed the powerless, so God would hold them accountable and meet them in judgment (4:12), not mercy. God wants justice to flow like a mighty river (Amos 5:24). Those who oppose it will be swept away.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of social justice is also made clear in the New Testament. Jesus drew a connection between proper worship and the practice of social justice, warning of the judgment that is coming upon those who do not express their faith in loving action toward others (see Matt 25:31-46). Right understanding must be matched by right practice, which serves as evidence of one’s faith (see Luke 10:25-37; John 13:35). Jesus’ followers recoginzed the significant role social justice needed to play within the early Christian communities (see Acts 2:44-45; Gal 2:9-10; 1 Tim 5:3-16; Jas 1:27–2:26; 1 Jn 3:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>God’s compassion for the oppressed is evidenced throughout Scripture. As followers of Christ, we must not neglect those who are in need, and like the prophets, we must confront injustice wherever it is encountered.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 23:1-12; Lev 19:9-18; Deut 10:17-20; 16:18-20; 24:10-22; 1 Kgs 21:1-24; 2 Chr 19:4-11; Pss 94:20-23; 146:3-9; Prov 22:8-9; 31:8-9; Eccl 5:8-9; Isa 1:17; 5:7; 9:6-7; 10:1-2; 42:1-4; 58:4-12; Amos 2:6-8; 5:7-17, 23-24; Matt 12:15-21; 23:23; Luke 10:25-37; Heb 1:8-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Social Justice In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s BC). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s BC (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue. Amos was appalled ...","summary_en":"Social Justice In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s BC). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s BC (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue. Amos was appalled ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144577,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Success","title_en":"True Success","content_ro":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\n<p>God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\n<p>Beginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\n<p>While the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Success<\/h3>\n<p>God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession of the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The author of 1–2 Kings introduces each ruler’s reign with a spiritual evaluation, often comparing each king’s devotion to God with the precedent set by David (see 1 Kgs 11:38; 14:8; 15:3-5, 11). The narrative of these books demonstrates that the fate of both Israel and Judah hangs on the spiritual leadership of their kings. The continued success of God’s people in the land of Canaan was predicated on the faithful worship of God (see Deut 12:4-7). Allowing worship at local pagan shrines is repeatedly singled out for disapproval (see, e.g., 3:2-4; 11:7).<\/p>\n<p>Beginning with Jeroboam I, the kings of Israel (the northern kingdom) uniformly practiced apostate religion and were censured for practicing it (12:31-32; 13:33-34; 15:25-26, 33-34; 16:11-13, 25-26). Of these kings, King Ahab was the most wicked (16:30-33; 21:25-26), and his son Ahaziah closely followed his example and is denounced for his idolatrous ways (22:51-53). The kings of the northern kingdom set their people on a course doomed for destruction (2 Kgs 17:21-23). Despite God’s repeated efforts to get his people’s attention (2 Kgs 17:13-15, 23), they failed to respond, so God invoked the penalties for persistent spiritual infidelity (see 1 Kgs 13:33-34).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom) receive commendation, but many of them are denounced as well. Rehoboam allowed pagan worship to spread in Judah (14:22-24), and Abijam continued in his father’s sins (15:3). Even the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat receive criticism for letting popular local worship sites continue (see 15:14; 22:43). Failure to give God his rightful place had disastrous results.<\/p>\n<p>While the kings and people of the northern kingdom foolishly pursued their own way, people who instead fear the Lord and live by the standards of God’s word will be blessed and find genuine contentment (Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15). True success is always found in acknowledging and trusting God to be king of one’s life (Matt 6:33). And as both Jesus and his early followers demonstrate, success is not necessarily characterized by material blessing and wealth. Joy and peace are ultimately found in being at the center of God’s will and in grasping the hope we have in him (see Phil 3:8-14; 1 Pet 4:12-19).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 6:1-8; 12:4-7; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Sam 18:14; 1 Kgs 11:38; 12:26-33; 13:1-3, 33-34; 14:8-11; 2 Kgs 17:13-23; Pss 33:12; 119:1-2; 144:15; Matt 6:33; Luke 10:25-28; 1 Jn 5:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","summary_en":"True Success God requires complete devotion from his people (Deut 6:4-6; cp. Matt 22:37). True success comes from seeking God and acknowledging him as sovereign (Matt 6:33), to the exclusion of all idols (1 Jn 5:21). For the people of Israel, success was directly tied to their obedience to God’s covenant (see Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68). The spiritual condition of Israel and its leaders had a dramatic impact on whether or not they would continue to receive God’s favor and maintain possession o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147511,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Social Justice","title_en":"Social Justice","content_ro":"<h3>Social Justice<\/h3>\n<p>In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s <span>BC<\/span>). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s <span>BC<\/span> (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue.<\/p>\n<p>Amos was appalled by Israel’s abuse of the powerless (Amos 2:6-8; 3:10). Unlike the surrounding nations, Israel had known God in a uniquely personal and intimate manner and then turned away from him (2:9-12; 3:1-2). The people of Israel had refused to worship God appropriately and had oppressed the powerless, so God would hold them accountable and meet them in judgment (4:12), not mercy. God wants justice to flow like a mighty river (Amos 5:24). Those who oppose it will be swept away.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of social justice is also made clear in the New Testament. Jesus drew a connection between proper worship and the practice of social justice, warning of the judgment that is coming upon those who do not express their faith in loving action toward others (see Matt 25:31-46). Right understanding must be matched by right practice, which serves as evidence of one’s faith (see Luke 10:25-37; John 13:35). Jesus’ followers recoginzed the significant role social justice needed to play within the early Christian communities (see Acts 2:44-45; Gal 2:9-10; 1 Tim 5:3-16; Jas 1:27–2:26; 1 Jn 3:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>God’s compassion for the oppressed is evidenced throughout Scripture. As followers of Christ, we must not neglect those who are in need, and like the prophets, we must confront injustice wherever it is encountered.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 23:1-12; Lev 19:9-18; Deut 10:17-20; 16:18-20; 24:10-22; 1 Kgs 21:1-24; 2 Chr 19:4-11; Pss 94:20-23; 146:3-9; Prov 22:8-9; 31:8-9; Eccl 5:8-9; Isa 1:17; 5:7; 9:6-7; 10:1-2; 42:1-4; 58:4-12; Amos 2:6-8; 5:7-17, 23-24; Matt 12:15-21; 23:23; Luke 10:25-37; Heb 1:8-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Social Justice<\/h3>\n<p>In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s <span>BC<\/span>). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s <span>BC<\/span> (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue.<\/p>\n<p>Amos was appalled by Israel’s abuse of the powerless (Amos 2:6-8; 3:10). Unlike the surrounding nations, Israel had known God in a uniquely personal and intimate manner and then turned away from him (2:9-12; 3:1-2). The people of Israel had refused to worship God appropriately and had oppressed the powerless, so God would hold them accountable and meet them in judgment (4:12), not mercy. God wants justice to flow like a mighty river (Amos 5:24). Those who oppose it will be swept away.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of social justice is also made clear in the New Testament. Jesus drew a connection between proper worship and the practice of social justice, warning of the judgment that is coming upon those who do not express their faith in loving action toward others (see Matt 25:31-46). Right understanding must be matched by right practice, which serves as evidence of one’s faith (see Luke 10:25-37; John 13:35). Jesus’ followers recoginzed the significant role social justice needed to play within the early Christian communities (see Acts 2:44-45; Gal 2:9-10; 1 Tim 5:3-16; Jas 1:27–2:26; 1 Jn 3:17-19).<\/p>\n<p>God’s compassion for the oppressed is evidenced throughout Scripture. As followers of Christ, we must not neglect those who are in need, and like the prophets, we must confront injustice wherever it is encountered.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 23:1-12; Lev 19:9-18; Deut 10:17-20; 16:18-20; 24:10-22; 1 Kgs 21:1-24; 2 Chr 19:4-11; Pss 94:20-23; 146:3-9; Prov 22:8-9; 31:8-9; Eccl 5:8-9; Isa 1:17; 5:7; 9:6-7; 10:1-2; 42:1-4; 58:4-12; Amos 2:6-8; 5:7-17, 23-24; Matt 12:15-21; 23:23; Luke 10:25-37; Heb 1:8-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Social Justice In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s BC). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s BC (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue. Amos was appalled ...","summary_en":"Social Justice In the Old Testament, prophets often confronted evil in society and articulated a demand for social justice. An early example of this is found in Elijah’s response to the murder of Naboth, followed by his rebuke of Ahab (1 Kgs 21:16-24, 800s BC). The social aspect of the prophetic message became even more prominent among the prophets of the 700s BC (Hosea and Amos in Israel, Micah and Isaiah in Judah), with Amos as the most articulate spokesman on this issue. Amos was appalled ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":9486,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Deuteronomy","title_en":"Book of Deuteronomy","content_ro":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandAuthorship\">Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>Two basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\n<p>As early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his <em>Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\n<p>In recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\n<p>The fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalSetting\">Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>Moses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\n<p>In that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceofDeuteronomy\">Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>Deuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\n<p>The primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeuteronomyandtheLaw\">Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>To designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\n<p>The NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\n<p>Instructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Love is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, the <span>Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Moses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>Moses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n<p>“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\n<p>In the first century <span>AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\n<p>In worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\n<p>Canaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\n<p>Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\n<p>In human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\n<p>In domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\n<p>When the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\n<p>The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>After some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandAuthorship\">Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>Two basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\n<p>As early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his <em>Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\n<p>In recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\n<p>The fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalSetting\">Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>Moses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\n<p>In that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceofDeuteronomy\">Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>Deuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\n<p>The primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeuteronomyandtheLaw\">Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>To designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\n<p>The NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\n<p>Instructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Love is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, the <span>Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Moses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>Moses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n<p>“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\n<p>In the first century <span>AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\n<p>In worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\n<p>Canaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\n<p>Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\n<p>In human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\n<p>In domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\n<p>When the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\n<p>The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>After some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","summary_en":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15766,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Heart","title_en":"Heart","content_ro":"<h3>HEART<\/h3>\n<p>Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being.<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">leb<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kardia<\/span>) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhysicalHeart\">Physical Heart<\/p>\n<p>That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physical food and wine affect the heart (Jgs 19:5; Ps 104:15; Acts 14:17), and the heart can “faint” and “tremble.” The heart’s position in the body yields an obvious metaphor for “the center” (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PyschologicalHeart\">Pyschological Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart attends intellectually (e.g., Jer 12:11); it also perceives (Jn 12:40), understands (1 Kgs 3:9), debates (Mk 2:6), reflects (Lk 2:19), remembers (Lk 2:51), thinks (Dt 8:17), imagines (Lk 1:51), is wise (Eccl 1:17, <span>kjv<\/span>), has technical skill (Ex 28:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Emotionally, the heart experiences intoxicated merriment (1 Sm 25:36), gladness (Is 30:29), joy (Jn 16:22), sorrow (Neh 2:2), anguish (Rom 9:2), bitterness (Prv 14:10), anxiety (1 Sm 4:13), despair (Eccl 2:20), love (2 Sm 14:1), trust (Ps 112:7), affection (2 Cor 7:3), lust (Mt 5:28), callousness (Mk 3:5), hatred (Lv 19:17), fear (Gn 42:28), jealousy (Jas 3:14), desire (Rom 10:1), discouragement (Nm 32:9), sympathy (Ex 23:9), anger (Dt 19:6, <span>kjv<\/span>), irresolution (2 Chr 13:7, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Volitionally, the heart can purpose (1 Cor 4:5), incline to (1 Sm 14:7), prompt (2 Kgs 12:4; cf. Prv 4:23), be steadfast (Acts 11:23), be willing (Ex 35:22), contrive evil (Acts 5:4), or follow its “treasure” (Mt 6:21).<\/p>\n<p>Morally, the heart can be gentle, lowly (Mt 11:29), holy (1 Thes 3:13), faithful (Neh 9:8), upright (Ps 97:11), pure, single-minded (Jas 4:8), clean (Acts 15:8), loving toward God (Mk 12:30) and others (1 Pt 1:22), hardened, or sensitive (Ez 11:19). Scripture’s emphasis falls upon the heart’s evil (Gn 6:5 and throughout), as self-deceiving (Jas 1:26), deceitful (Jer 17:9), avaricious (Mt 6:19-21), lustful (Mt 5:28), arrogant (Is 9:9), impious (Acts 7:51), perverse (Ps 101:4), and impenitent (Rom 2:5). Nothing defiles a man worse than his own heart (Mk 7:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Yet out of the heart can come good (Lk 6:45; 8:15). Even when frustrated by circumstances or by fear, the heart’s good intention remains good; its evil intent, bad (1 Kgs 8:18; Mt 5:28).<\/p>\n<p>Being so complex, a person’s heart is sadly divided, and Scripture often extols a perfect, whole, true (i.e., united) heart (Gn 20:5; Ps 86:11; Acts 8:37). The “heart” signifies the total inner self, a person’s hidden core of being (1 Pt 3:4), with which one communes, which one “pours out” in prayer, words, and deeds (Ps 62:8; Mt 15:18-19). It is the genuine self, distinguished from appearance, public position, and physical presence (1 Sm 16:7; 2 Cor 5:12; 1 Thes 2:17). And this “heart-self” has its own nature, character, and disposition (Dn 4:16; 7:4, <span>kjv<\/span>; cf. Mt 12:33-37).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSpiritualHeart\">The Spiritual Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart is especially important in biblical religion. The mystery of the hidden self is fully known to God and to Christ (Jer 17:10; Lk 9:47; Rom 8:27), and the heart is the seat of our knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:6). The state of heart governs the vision of God (Mt 5:8); from the heart one speaks to God (Ps 27:8); the heart is the locus of divine indwelling (2 Cor 1:22; Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, moral evil in the heart is seen in biblical perspective as sin against God. Senseless hearts are darkened, often secretly idolatrous, far from God, “not right” before God (Dt 29:18-19; Mt 15:8; Acts 8:21; Rom 1:21). Yet the Lord will not despise a broken, contrite heart (Ps 51:17). When one’s heart is turned toward God, he promises to make it sensitive to divine things, renewed and purified (Dt 4:29; 2 Kgs 23:25; Ps 51:10; Jl 2:13; Ez 36:25-27). God’s law shall then be written on the heart as the inward guide and incentive (Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10; cf. 2 Cor 3:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Christian terms, such transformation involves believing the gospel from the “honest and good heart” that provides fruitful soil for the Word of God (Lk 8:15; Rom 10:9). The true heart draws near to God, loves him with all its intellect, feeling, and will (Lk 10:27; Heb 10:22). Then God gives strength, reward, renewal, grace, peace, and joy to the heart (Ps 73:26; Is 57:15; Acts 2:46; Phil 4:7; Heb 13:9). So the ancient ideal becomes possible again, that of being “a man after God’s own heart” (1 Sm 13:14; Acts 13:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEART<\/h3>\n<p>Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being.<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">leb<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kardia<\/span>) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhysicalHeart\">Physical Heart<\/p>\n<p>That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physical food and wine affect the heart (Jgs 19:5; Ps 104:15; Acts 14:17), and the heart can “faint” and “tremble.” The heart’s position in the body yields an obvious metaphor for “the center” (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PyschologicalHeart\">Pyschological Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart attends intellectually (e.g., Jer 12:11); it also perceives (Jn 12:40), understands (1 Kgs 3:9), debates (Mk 2:6), reflects (Lk 2:19), remembers (Lk 2:51), thinks (Dt 8:17), imagines (Lk 1:51), is wise (Eccl 1:17, <span>kjv<\/span>), has technical skill (Ex 28:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Emotionally, the heart experiences intoxicated merriment (1 Sm 25:36), gladness (Is 30:29), joy (Jn 16:22), sorrow (Neh 2:2), anguish (Rom 9:2), bitterness (Prv 14:10), anxiety (1 Sm 4:13), despair (Eccl 2:20), love (2 Sm 14:1), trust (Ps 112:7), affection (2 Cor 7:3), lust (Mt 5:28), callousness (Mk 3:5), hatred (Lv 19:17), fear (Gn 42:28), jealousy (Jas 3:14), desire (Rom 10:1), discouragement (Nm 32:9), sympathy (Ex 23:9), anger (Dt 19:6, <span>kjv<\/span>), irresolution (2 Chr 13:7, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Volitionally, the heart can purpose (1 Cor 4:5), incline to (1 Sm 14:7), prompt (2 Kgs 12:4; cf. Prv 4:23), be steadfast (Acts 11:23), be willing (Ex 35:22), contrive evil (Acts 5:4), or follow its “treasure” (Mt 6:21).<\/p>\n<p>Morally, the heart can be gentle, lowly (Mt 11:29), holy (1 Thes 3:13), faithful (Neh 9:8), upright (Ps 97:11), pure, single-minded (Jas 4:8), clean (Acts 15:8), loving toward God (Mk 12:30) and others (1 Pt 1:22), hardened, or sensitive (Ez 11:19). Scripture’s emphasis falls upon the heart’s evil (Gn 6:5 and throughout), as self-deceiving (Jas 1:26), deceitful (Jer 17:9), avaricious (Mt 6:19-21), lustful (Mt 5:28), arrogant (Is 9:9), impious (Acts 7:51), perverse (Ps 101:4), and impenitent (Rom 2:5). Nothing defiles a man worse than his own heart (Mk 7:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Yet out of the heart can come good (Lk 6:45; 8:15). Even when frustrated by circumstances or by fear, the heart’s good intention remains good; its evil intent, bad (1 Kgs 8:18; Mt 5:28).<\/p>\n<p>Being so complex, a person’s heart is sadly divided, and Scripture often extols a perfect, whole, true (i.e., united) heart (Gn 20:5; Ps 86:11; Acts 8:37). The “heart” signifies the total inner self, a person’s hidden core of being (1 Pt 3:4), with which one communes, which one “pours out” in prayer, words, and deeds (Ps 62:8; Mt 15:18-19). It is the genuine self, distinguished from appearance, public position, and physical presence (1 Sm 16:7; 2 Cor 5:12; 1 Thes 2:17). And this “heart-self” has its own nature, character, and disposition (Dn 4:16; 7:4, <span>kjv<\/span>; cf. Mt 12:33-37).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSpiritualHeart\">The Spiritual Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart is especially important in biblical religion. The mystery of the hidden self is fully known to God and to Christ (Jer 17:10; Lk 9:47; Rom 8:27), and the heart is the seat of our knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:6). The state of heart governs the vision of God (Mt 5:8); from the heart one speaks to God (Ps 27:8); the heart is the locus of divine indwelling (2 Cor 1:22; Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, moral evil in the heart is seen in biblical perspective as sin against God. Senseless hearts are darkened, often secretly idolatrous, far from God, “not right” before God (Dt 29:18-19; Mt 15:8; Acts 8:21; Rom 1:21). Yet the Lord will not despise a broken, contrite heart (Ps 51:17). When one’s heart is turned toward God, he promises to make it sensitive to divine things, renewed and purified (Dt 4:29; 2 Kgs 23:25; Ps 51:10; Jl 2:13; Ez 36:25-27). God’s law shall then be written on the heart as the inward guide and incentive (Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10; cf. 2 Cor 3:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Christian terms, such transformation involves believing the gospel from the “honest and good heart” that provides fruitful soil for the Word of God (Lk 8:15; Rom 10:9). The true heart draws near to God, loves him with all its intellect, feeling, and will (Lk 10:27; Heb 10:22). Then God gives strength, reward, renewal, grace, peace, and joy to the heart (Ps 73:26; Is 57:15; Acts 2:46; Phil 4:7; Heb 13:9). So the ancient ideal becomes possible again, that of being “a man after God’s own heart” (1 Sm 13:14; Acts 13:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEART Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being. In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew leb; Greek kardia) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great. Physical Heart That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see nlt mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physi...","summary_en":"HEART Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being. In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew leb; Greek kardia) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great. Physical Heart That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see nlt mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physi...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22741,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Concept of Law","title_en":"Biblical Concept of Law","content_ro":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","summary_en":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25777,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mind","title_en":"Mind","content_ro":"<h3>MIND<\/h3>\n<p>One’s intellectual processes in a narrow sense or, more broadly, the sum total of a person’s mental and moral state of being. To the Hebrew way of thinking, there is no distinctive terminology for the concept of the mind. To the Greek world, the mind plays a very important role in the understanding of humans.<\/p>\n<p>Since in the OT there was no separate word that could be used for the human mind, translators of the English versions have supplied other words (“soul,” “spirit,” or “heart”), as the context dictates. Thus, precise distinctions among these terms are hard to define. A person is a soul, having a spirit and a heart. Any of these terms may represent the mind. This means that the widely held distinction between the mind as the seat of thinking and the heart as the seat of feeling is alien to the meanings these terms carry in the OT.<\/p>\n<p>While the “mind” denotes a person’s thoughts, the prominent idea of “mind” in the OT is that it denotes the heart (1 Sm 2:35; Ez 11:5; 20:32). The heart is often intended to include the entire inner person and thus often relates especially to the mind. In these instances it relates primarily to the functions of will and memory (Is 46:8; 65:17; Jer 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>The basic patterns of Hebrew reasoning continue in the Gospel accounts. The conception of mind appears quite rarely. When used, it is mostly in connection with the heart—for example, the imaginations of the heart (Lk 1:51). The only other occurrences of the word “mind” come in the statement of the great commandment: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind” (cf. Mt 22:37; Mk 12:30; Lk 10:27). The Gospel writers are unanimous in their agreement that Jesus added “with all your mind” to Deuteronomy 6:5. In Mark, however, the questioner repeats the command of Jesus but with a word for “understanding” in place of the word for “mind” (Mk 12:33).<\/p>\n<p>With the writings of Paul, one moves into the Greek world. Paul understood the mind as distinct from the spirit of man. It possesses the ability to understand and to reason (1 Cor 14:14-19); it is the seat of intelligence. In other places, “mind” is used in a broader sense that includes the entire mental and moral process or state of being of a human (Rom 12:2; Eph 4:23). A human’s actions flow from the inclinations of his or her mind. Whether a person is good or evil depends on the state of the mind.<\/p>\n<p>The state of a person depends upon what or who controls the mind. Romans 8:6-7 speaks of a person’s mind being controlled either by the flesh or by the Spirit. The person whose mind is controlled by the flesh is evil. The mind controlled by the Spirit leads to good. Other passages refer to the inclination of a person’s mind being controlled by the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4). People whose minds are controlled by the “god of this world” will have their minds darkened and will not be able to understand the world as it really is (3:14). It is as a veil over one’s understanding. But the Lord can open people’s minds. For example, Jesus opened the minds of the disciples who walked the Emmaus road with him so that they might understand the Scriptures (Lk 24:45).<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, the action of conversion is considered to be a “renewing of the mind” (Rom 12:2; Eph 4:23). In both cases, the process is one whereby God takes control of the mind of a person through the Holy Spirit and leads the thoughts of that person into proper channels. Thus, the renewed person is given power to make proper value judgments. Such people have new minds with which to make spiritual discernments (1 Cor 2:15-16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Man; Heart; Soul.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MIND<\/h3>\n<p>One’s intellectual processes in a narrow sense or, more broadly, the sum total of a person’s mental and moral state of being. To the Hebrew way of thinking, there is no distinctive terminology for the concept of the mind. To the Greek world, the mind plays a very important role in the understanding of humans.<\/p>\n<p>Since in the OT there was no separate word that could be used for the human mind, translators of the English versions have supplied other words (“soul,” “spirit,” or “heart”), as the context dictates. Thus, precise distinctions among these terms are hard to define. A person is a soul, having a spirit and a heart. Any of these terms may represent the mind. This means that the widely held distinction between the mind as the seat of thinking and the heart as the seat of feeling is alien to the meanings these terms carry in the OT.<\/p>\n<p>While the “mind” denotes a person’s thoughts, the prominent idea of “mind” in the OT is that it denotes the heart (1 Sm 2:35; Ez 11:5; 20:32). The heart is often intended to include the entire inner person and thus often relates especially to the mind. In these instances it relates primarily to the functions of will and memory (Is 46:8; 65:17; Jer 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>The basic patterns of Hebrew reasoning continue in the Gospel accounts. The conception of mind appears quite rarely. When used, it is mostly in connection with the heart—for example, the imaginations of the heart (Lk 1:51). The only other occurrences of the word “mind” come in the statement of the great commandment: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind” (cf. Mt 22:37; Mk 12:30; Lk 10:27). The Gospel writers are unanimous in their agreement that Jesus added “with all your mind” to Deuteronomy 6:5. In Mark, however, the questioner repeats the command of Jesus but with a word for “understanding” in place of the word for “mind” (Mk 12:33).<\/p>\n<p>With the writings of Paul, one moves into the Greek world. Paul understood the mind as distinct from the spirit of man. It possesses the ability to understand and to reason (1 Cor 14:14-19); it is the seat of intelligence. In other places, “mind” is used in a broader sense that includes the entire mental and moral process or state of being of a human (Rom 12:2; Eph 4:23). A human’s actions flow from the inclinations of his or her mind. Whether a person is good or evil depends on the state of the mind.<\/p>\n<p>The state of a person depends upon what or who controls the mind. Romans 8:6-7 speaks of a person’s mind being controlled either by the flesh or by the Spirit. The person whose mind is controlled by the flesh is evil. The mind controlled by the Spirit leads to good. Other passages refer to the inclination of a person’s mind being controlled by the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4). People whose minds are controlled by the “god of this world” will have their minds darkened and will not be able to understand the world as it really is (3:14). It is as a veil over one’s understanding. But the Lord can open people’s minds. For example, Jesus opened the minds of the disciples who walked the Emmaus road with him so that they might understand the Scriptures (Lk 24:45).<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, the action of conversion is considered to be a “renewing of the mind” (Rom 12:2; Eph 4:23). In both cases, the process is one whereby God takes control of the mind of a person through the Holy Spirit and leads the thoughts of that person into proper channels. Thus, the renewed person is given power to make proper value judgments. Such people have new minds with which to make spiritual discernments (1 Cor 2:15-16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Man; Heart; Soul.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MIND One’s intellectual processes in a narrow sense or, more broadly, the sum total of a person’s mental and moral state of being. To the Hebrew way of thinking, there is no distinctive terminology for the concept of the mind. To the Greek world, the mind plays a very important role in the understanding of humans. Since in the OT there was no separate word that could be used for the human mind, translators of the English versions have supplied other words (“soul,” “spirit,” or “heart”), as th...","summary_en":"MIND One’s intellectual processes in a narrow sense or, more broadly, the sum total of a person’s mental and moral state of being. To the Hebrew way of thinking, there is no distinctive terminology for the concept of the mind. To the Greek world, the mind plays a very important role in the understanding of humans. Since in the OT there was no separate word that could be used for the human mind, translators of the English versions have supplied other words (“soul,” “spirit,” or “heart”), as th...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55890,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:27","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:27<\/strong> <em>You must love the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> your God:<\/em> Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the <em>Shema,<\/em> which every Jew was to repeat daily.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:27<\/strong> <em>You must love the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> your God:<\/em> Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the <em>Shema,<\/em> which every Jew was to repeat daily.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:27 You must love the Lord your God: Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the Shema, which every Jew was to repeat daily.","summary_en":"10:27 You must love the Lord your God: Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the Shema, which every Jew was to repeat daily.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83516,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:27","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:27<\/strong> <em>You must love the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> your God:<\/em> Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the <em>Shema,<\/em> which every Jew was to repeat daily.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:27<\/strong> <em>You must love the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> your God:<\/em> Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the <em>Shema,<\/em> which every Jew was to repeat daily.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:27 You must love the Lord your God: Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the Shema, which every Jew was to repeat daily.","summary_en":"10:27 You must love the Lord your God: Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the Shema, which every Jew was to repeat daily.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111142,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:27","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:27<\/strong> <em>You must love the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> your God:<\/em> Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the <em>Shema,<\/em> which every Jew was to repeat daily.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:27<\/strong> <em>You must love the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> your God:<\/em> Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the <em>Shema,<\/em> which every Jew was to repeat daily.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:27 You must love the Lord your God: Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the Shema, which every Jew was to repeat daily.","summary_en":"10:27 You must love the Lord your God: Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the Shema, which every Jew was to repeat daily.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138768,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:27","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:27<\/strong> <em>You must love the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> your God:<\/em> Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the <em>Shema,<\/em> which every Jew was to repeat daily.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:27<\/strong> <em>You must love the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> your God:<\/em> Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the <em>Shema,<\/em> which every Jew was to repeat daily.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:27 You must love the Lord your God: Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the Shema, which every Jew was to repeat daily.","summary_en":"10:27 You must love the Lord your God: Jesus identified Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 as the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-34). Deuteronomy 6:5 is part of the prayer known as the Shema, which every Jew was to repeat daily.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64121,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91747,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119373,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146999,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":55891,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>Do this and you will live!<\/em> Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>Do this and you will live!<\/em> Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28 Do this and you will live! Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.","summary_en":"10:28 Do this and you will live! Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83517,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>Do this and you will live!<\/em> Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>Do this and you will live!<\/em> Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28 Do this and you will live! Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.","summary_en":"10:28 Do this and you will live! Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111143,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>Do this and you will live!<\/em> Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>Do this and you will live!<\/em> Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28 Do this and you will live! Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.","summary_en":"10:28 Do this and you will live! Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138769,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>Do this and you will live!<\/em> Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>Do this and you will live!<\/em> Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28 Do this and you will live! Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.","summary_en":"10:28 Do this and you will live! Jesus was not suggesting that people would be saved by their works; rather, such love expresses genuine faith and devotion to the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":17293,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Psalms*, Imprecatory","title_en":"Psalms*, Imprecatory","content_ro":"<h3>IMPRECATORY PSALMS*<\/h3>\n<p>Psalms that contain curses (imprecations, maledictions) against enemies. These elements do not make up an entire psalm, but verses of this nature appear in approximately 20 psalms (e.g., Pss 5, 17, 28, 35, 40, 55, 59, 70, 71, 74, 79, 80, 94, 109, 129, 137, 139, 140). A number of other psalms express the same ideas as future or accomplished acts of the Lord. Usually these expressions are couched in the form of a prayer or a wish. They voice the desire that evil may come upon an enemy as judgment or retribution.<\/p>\n<p>To the casual reader, such statements may appear to be at variance with much of the rest of Scripture, especially with the teaching of Jesus. The clear injunction of Leviticus 19:17-18 states, “Do not nurse hatred in your heart for any of your relatives. Confront your neighbors directly so you will not be held guilty for their crimes. Never seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone, but love your neighbor as yourself” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Jesus expanded the concept of neighbor to include even the despised Samaritan (Lk 10:29-37). In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus declared, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Mt 5:44, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. vv 38-48). This is in harmony with the teaching of the OT, which instructs one to feed a hungry enemy and give water to a thirsty one (Prv 25:21-22; cf. Rom 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 109 is often singled out as contradicting Jesus’ teachings, for it has the greatest imprecatory content, and its statements are stronger than other psalms of this character. Some have suggested that the maledictions of this psalm are unworthy of Scripture and are expressions of wicked human emotions that should not be included in the Bible. However, it needs to be seen that this psalm has been regarded as both prophetic and messianic. This was the view of Chrysostom, Jerome, Augustine, and others. This was also the interpretation of Horne, who in his commentary translates the imperfect tenses of this psalm as futures, not the subjunctives of our English versions. He took his cue for this prophetic interpretation from Peter’s quotation of verse 8 upon the occasion of choosing a successor for Judas (Acts 1:20). The psalm can then fit the experiences of the life and passion of Jesus, which changes its tenor completely and in large measure removes it from being imprecatory and makes it predictive.<\/p>\n<p>Another passage that has been abhorrent to many occurs in Psalm 137:8-9, which speaks of the joy of those who dash Babylonian children on a rock. Horne took this as predictive of what took place when the armies of the Medes and Persians conquered the city of Babylon in 539 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>If one predicates that the expressions in the psalms are curses or desires for retribution, they are not out of keeping with the rest of Scripture. The prayer of Jeremiah for vengeance on his persecutors (Jer 11:20) received direct affirmative response from the Lord (vv 21-23). The plea of the righteous for justice and vindication will be answered speedily (Lk 18:1-8). In Revelation those who had been slain for the Word of God and for their testimony cry out, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge the people who belong to this world for what they have done to us?” (Rv 6:10, <span>nlt<\/span>), and they were heard. David, to whom Psalm 109 is attributed, was given victory and vengeance over his enemies, as he realized that those who were his enemies were also the enemies of God. Evidently the enemies against whom the psalmist prayed had reached the place where they should receive judgment, and the imprecations of the writer coincided with the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judgment; Psalms, Book of; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>IMPRECATORY PSALMS*<\/h3>\n<p>Psalms that contain curses (imprecations, maledictions) against enemies. These elements do not make up an entire psalm, but verses of this nature appear in approximately 20 psalms (e.g., Pss 5, 17, 28, 35, 40, 55, 59, 70, 71, 74, 79, 80, 94, 109, 129, 137, 139, 140). A number of other psalms express the same ideas as future or accomplished acts of the Lord. Usually these expressions are couched in the form of a prayer or a wish. They voice the desire that evil may come upon an enemy as judgment or retribution.<\/p>\n<p>To the casual reader, such statements may appear to be at variance with much of the rest of Scripture, especially with the teaching of Jesus. The clear injunction of Leviticus 19:17-18 states, “Do not nurse hatred in your heart for any of your relatives. Confront your neighbors directly so you will not be held guilty for their crimes. Never seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone, but love your neighbor as yourself” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Jesus expanded the concept of neighbor to include even the despised Samaritan (Lk 10:29-37). In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus declared, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Mt 5:44, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. vv 38-48). This is in harmony with the teaching of the OT, which instructs one to feed a hungry enemy and give water to a thirsty one (Prv 25:21-22; cf. Rom 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 109 is often singled out as contradicting Jesus’ teachings, for it has the greatest imprecatory content, and its statements are stronger than other psalms of this character. Some have suggested that the maledictions of this psalm are unworthy of Scripture and are expressions of wicked human emotions that should not be included in the Bible. However, it needs to be seen that this psalm has been regarded as both prophetic and messianic. This was the view of Chrysostom, Jerome, Augustine, and others. This was also the interpretation of Horne, who in his commentary translates the imperfect tenses of this psalm as futures, not the subjunctives of our English versions. He took his cue for this prophetic interpretation from Peter’s quotation of verse 8 upon the occasion of choosing a successor for Judas (Acts 1:20). The psalm can then fit the experiences of the life and passion of Jesus, which changes its tenor completely and in large measure removes it from being imprecatory and makes it predictive.<\/p>\n<p>Another passage that has been abhorrent to many occurs in Psalm 137:8-9, which speaks of the joy of those who dash Babylonian children on a rock. Horne took this as predictive of what took place when the armies of the Medes and Persians conquered the city of Babylon in 539 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>If one predicates that the expressions in the psalms are curses or desires for retribution, they are not out of keeping with the rest of Scripture. The prayer of Jeremiah for vengeance on his persecutors (Jer 11:20) received direct affirmative response from the Lord (vv 21-23). The plea of the righteous for justice and vindication will be answered speedily (Lk 18:1-8). In Revelation those who had been slain for the Word of God and for their testimony cry out, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge the people who belong to this world for what they have done to us?” (Rv 6:10, <span>nlt<\/span>), and they were heard. David, to whom Psalm 109 is attributed, was given victory and vengeance over his enemies, as he realized that those who were his enemies were also the enemies of God. Evidently the enemies against whom the psalmist prayed had reached the place where they should receive judgment, and the imprecations of the writer coincided with the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judgment; Psalms, Book of; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"IMPRECATORY PSALMS* Psalms that contain curses (imprecations, maledictions) against enemies. These elements do not make up an entire psalm, but verses of this nature appear in approximately 20 psalms (e.g., Pss 5, 17, 28, 35, 40, 55, 59, 70, 71, 74, 79, 80, 94, 109, 129, 137, 139, 140). A number of other psalms express the same ideas as future or accomplished acts of the Lord. Usually these expressions are couched in the form of a prayer or a wish. They voice the desire that evil may come upo...","summary_en":"IMPRECATORY PSALMS* Psalms that contain curses (imprecations, maledictions) against enemies. These elements do not make up an entire psalm, but verses of this nature appear in approximately 20 psalms (e.g., Pss 5, 17, 28, 35, 40, 55, 59, 70, 71, 74, 79, 80, 94, 109, 129, 137, 139, 140). A number of other psalms express the same ideas as future or accomplished acts of the Lord. Usually these expressions are couched in the form of a prayer or a wish. They voice the desire that evil may come upo...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19518,"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":27290,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Neighbor","title_en":"Neighbor","content_ro":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","summary_en":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55892,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:29","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:29<\/strong> <em>who is my neighbor?<\/em> A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:29<\/strong> <em>who is my neighbor?<\/em> A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:29 who is my neighbor? A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.","summary_en":"10:29 who is my neighbor? A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83518,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:29","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:29<\/strong> <em>who is my neighbor?<\/em> A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:29<\/strong> <em>who is my neighbor?<\/em> A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:29 who is my neighbor? A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.","summary_en":"10:29 who is my neighbor? A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111144,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:29","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:29<\/strong> <em>who is my neighbor?<\/em> A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:29<\/strong> <em>who is my neighbor?<\/em> A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:29 who is my neighbor? A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.","summary_en":"10:29 who is my neighbor? A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138770,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:29","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:29<\/strong> <em>who is my neighbor?<\/em> A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:29<\/strong> <em>who is my neighbor?<\/em> A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:29 who is my neighbor? A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.","summary_en":"10:29 who is my neighbor? A neighbor, in this context, was normally identified as a fellow Israelite.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"30":[{"id":709,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adummim","title_en":"Adummim","content_ro":"<h3>ADUMMIM<\/h3>\n<p>Pass extending from the hill country into the Jordan Valley, which formed part of Judah’s northern border (Jos 15:7). It is a reference point establishing the location of Geliloth on Benjamin’s southern border (Jos 18:17). The road from Jerusalem to Jericho ran through this mountain pass. The church father Jerome felt that this place was the setting for Jesus’ story of the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-37). The modern Arabic name means “ascent of blood.” The Hebrew name Adummim (“red rocks”) probably stems from the natural color of the rocks rather than from the fate of many travelers through the pass at the hands of robbers.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADUMMIM<\/h3>\n<p>Pass extending from the hill country into the Jordan Valley, which formed part of Judah’s northern border (Jos 15:7). It is a reference point establishing the location of Geliloth on Benjamin’s southern border (Jos 18:17). The road from Jerusalem to Jericho ran through this mountain pass. The church father Jerome felt that this place was the setting for Jesus’ story of the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-37). The modern Arabic name means “ascent of blood.” The Hebrew name Adummim (“red rocks”) probably stems from the natural color of the rocks rather than from the fate of many travelers through the pass at the hands of robbers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADUMMIM Pass extending from the hill country into the Jordan Valley, which formed part of Judah’s northern border (Jos 15:7). It is a reference point establishing the location of Geliloth on Benjamin’s southern border (Jos 18:17). The road from Jerusalem to Jericho ran through this mountain pass. The church father Jerome felt that this place was the setting for Jesus’ story of the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-37). The modern Arabic name means “ascent of blood.” The Hebrew name Adummim (“red rocks...","summary_en":"ADUMMIM Pass extending from the hill country into the Jordan Valley, which formed part of Judah’s northern border (Jos 15:7). It is a reference point establishing the location of Geliloth on Benjamin’s southern border (Jos 18:17). The road from Jerusalem to Jericho ran through this mountain pass. The church father Jerome felt that this place was the setting for Jesus’ story of the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-37). The modern Arabic name means “ascent of blood.” The Hebrew name Adummim (“red rocks...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19120,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jericho","title_en":"Jericho","content_ro":"<h3>JERICHO<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient city on the west side of the Jordan River. The name Jericho may be connected to the ancient name of the Canaanite moon god. The Hebrew words for moon, month, new moon, and Jericho are very similar. Others associate it with the word for spirit or smell, assuming that the pleasant fragrances of the fruits and spices that grew in this oasis occasioned the name of the place. The OT occasionally calls it “the city of palm trees” (e.g., Dt 34:3; 2 Chr 28:15).<\/p>\n<p>Jericho was located on the west side of the Jordan River about five miles (8 kilometers) from the southernmost fords and about ten miles (16 kilometers) northwest of the Dead Sea. Being in the broad part of the plain of the Jordan, it lies nearly 1,000 feet (305 meters) below sea level and about 3,500 feet (1,067 meters) below Jerusalem, which was a mere 17 miles (27 kilometers) away. This simple topographical fact explains the incidental words in Jesus’ parable of the good Samaritan, “down from Jerusalem to Jericho” (Lk 10:30).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<h5>Prebiblical Record<\/h5>\n<p>Jericho was a large and thriving city for centuries, even millennia, before the Bible first mentions it in connection with the exodus from Egypt. In fact, Jericho is one of the oldest cities in the world, with remains dating to and before the Neolithic Age 10,000 years ago.<\/p>\n<p>For three reasons primitive people would have chosen this site, first as a settlement and eventually as a key city: (1) It has a copious spring, now called Elisha’s Fountain (cf. 2 Kgs 2:18-22). (2) It has a warm climate in the winter, although “hot” describes it in the summer. (3) It is strategically located at a Jordan ford and at the base of several routes leading westward to the foothills.<\/p>\n<p>The comings and goings of various populations can be reconstructed only sketchily from noninscriptional archaeological data. The civilizations grew more complex over the years, going from a simple food-gathering economy at first to the relatively complex urban society, complete with king, soldiers, and guest houses, that Joshua encountered. The first certain identification of its inhabitants occurs in Numbers 13:29: “The Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country; and the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<h5>In the Old Testament<\/h5>\n<p>The Jericho of the OT is best known as the first city taken by the invading Israelites through the miracle of the falling walls. Having spent some time on the east bank of the Jordan in the plains of Moab (Nm 22:1; 26:3, 63), the Israelites targeted it as the first military objective in the Conquest. Joshua sent spies to reconnoiter the land and the city. Rahab the harlot took them in and later engineered their escape. For her cooperation, she and her family were spared when Israel destroyed the city (Jos 2, 6). The fall of the city itself occurred after the Israelites had marched around it in silence, except for the continual blowing of trumpets, once a day for six days and then seven times on the seventh day. Then, as the priests blew the trumpets, the people shouted and the walls collapsed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua laid a curse on anyone who might rebuild Jericho (Jos 6:26). The curse was fulfilled about 500 years later when Hiel rebuilt the city at the cost of two of his sons (1 Kgs 16:34).<\/p>\n<p>Jericho was in the territory of Benjamin but right on the border with the territory of Ephraim to the north (Jos 16:1, 7; 18:12, 21) and appears in scattered incidents throughout the rest of the OT. In 2 Samuel 10:5 (see also 1 Chr 19:5) David had his humiliated ambassadors wait there until their beards grew back. It served as a kind of headquarters for Elisha and apparently was where a “company of the prophets” lived (2 Kgs 2:5; cf. 1 Sm 10:5). During the time of Ahaz, a return of prisoners took place there (2 Chr 28:15). When Jerusalem fell in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the reigning king, Zedekiah, fled to near Jericho but was caught by the Babylonians, who later put out his eyes at Riblah in Syria (2 Kgs 25:5; Jer 39:5; 52:8). The last OT references to Jericho are in the census lists of Ezra (Ezr 2:34) and Nehemiah (Neh 7:36). Men from Jericho also helped rebuild the Jerusalem wall (3:2).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>First, it must be understood that the Jericho of NT times was built by Herod more than a mile to the south of the OT site, at the mouth of the Wadi Qilt. It is possible to sort out the healing of the blind men episodes in the synoptic Gospels by understanding that Jesus was passing from the site of ancient Jericho (Mt 20:29; Mk 10:46) and approaching Herodian Jericho (Lk 18:35). The modern city of Jericho includes both these sites. As Jesus passed through Jericho (19:1) he met and ate with Zacchaeus, the wealthy chief tax collector of the new Roman Jericho. The city also figures in the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:30-37).<\/p>\n<h5>Postbiblical Record<\/h5>\n<p>While ancient Jericho was of small consequence after its destruction under Joshua, the Jericho of Herod was a city of beauty and importance. But even this city fell into decay with the decline of Roman influence in the Middle East. Most of what we know of the city until modern times comes from the writings of pilgrims to the Holy Land. They usually report seeing certain things of biblical significance, such as the tree that Zacchaeus climbed, but they also report that Jericho was a squalid, wretched Muslim village. And such it has been until relatively recent times, when it grew in size and importance as a major West Bank city.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JERICHO<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient city on the west side of the Jordan River. The name Jericho may be connected to the ancient name of the Canaanite moon god. The Hebrew words for moon, month, new moon, and Jericho are very similar. Others associate it with the word for spirit or smell, assuming that the pleasant fragrances of the fruits and spices that grew in this oasis occasioned the name of the place. The OT occasionally calls it “the city of palm trees” (e.g., Dt 34:3; 2 Chr 28:15).<\/p>\n<p>Jericho was located on the west side of the Jordan River about five miles (8 kilometers) from the southernmost fords and about ten miles (16 kilometers) northwest of the Dead Sea. Being in the broad part of the plain of the Jordan, it lies nearly 1,000 feet (305 meters) below sea level and about 3,500 feet (1,067 meters) below Jerusalem, which was a mere 17 miles (27 kilometers) away. This simple topographical fact explains the incidental words in Jesus’ parable of the good Samaritan, “down from Jerusalem to Jericho” (Lk 10:30).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<h5>Prebiblical Record<\/h5>\n<p>Jericho was a large and thriving city for centuries, even millennia, before the Bible first mentions it in connection with the exodus from Egypt. In fact, Jericho is one of the oldest cities in the world, with remains dating to and before the Neolithic Age 10,000 years ago.<\/p>\n<p>For three reasons primitive people would have chosen this site, first as a settlement and eventually as a key city: (1) It has a copious spring, now called Elisha’s Fountain (cf. 2 Kgs 2:18-22). (2) It has a warm climate in the winter, although “hot” describes it in the summer. (3) It is strategically located at a Jordan ford and at the base of several routes leading westward to the foothills.<\/p>\n<p>The comings and goings of various populations can be reconstructed only sketchily from noninscriptional archaeological data. The civilizations grew more complex over the years, going from a simple food-gathering economy at first to the relatively complex urban society, complete with king, soldiers, and guest houses, that Joshua encountered. The first certain identification of its inhabitants occurs in Numbers 13:29: “The Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country; and the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<h5>In the Old Testament<\/h5>\n<p>The Jericho of the OT is best known as the first city taken by the invading Israelites through the miracle of the falling walls. Having spent some time on the east bank of the Jordan in the plains of Moab (Nm 22:1; 26:3, 63), the Israelites targeted it as the first military objective in the Conquest. Joshua sent spies to reconnoiter the land and the city. Rahab the harlot took them in and later engineered their escape. For her cooperation, she and her family were spared when Israel destroyed the city (Jos 2, 6). The fall of the city itself occurred after the Israelites had marched around it in silence, except for the continual blowing of trumpets, once a day for six days and then seven times on the seventh day. Then, as the priests blew the trumpets, the people shouted and the walls collapsed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua laid a curse on anyone who might rebuild Jericho (Jos 6:26). The curse was fulfilled about 500 years later when Hiel rebuilt the city at the cost of two of his sons (1 Kgs 16:34).<\/p>\n<p>Jericho was in the territory of Benjamin but right on the border with the territory of Ephraim to the north (Jos 16:1, 7; 18:12, 21) and appears in scattered incidents throughout the rest of the OT. In 2 Samuel 10:5 (see also 1 Chr 19:5) David had his humiliated ambassadors wait there until their beards grew back. It served as a kind of headquarters for Elisha and apparently was where a “company of the prophets” lived (2 Kgs 2:5; cf. 1 Sm 10:5). During the time of Ahaz, a return of prisoners took place there (2 Chr 28:15). When Jerusalem fell in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the reigning king, Zedekiah, fled to near Jericho but was caught by the Babylonians, who later put out his eyes at Riblah in Syria (2 Kgs 25:5; Jer 39:5; 52:8). The last OT references to Jericho are in the census lists of Ezra (Ezr 2:34) and Nehemiah (Neh 7:36). Men from Jericho also helped rebuild the Jerusalem wall (3:2).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>First, it must be understood that the Jericho of NT times was built by Herod more than a mile to the south of the OT site, at the mouth of the Wadi Qilt. It is possible to sort out the healing of the blind men episodes in the synoptic Gospels by understanding that Jesus was passing from the site of ancient Jericho (Mt 20:29; Mk 10:46) and approaching Herodian Jericho (Lk 18:35). The modern city of Jericho includes both these sites. As Jesus passed through Jericho (19:1) he met and ate with Zacchaeus, the wealthy chief tax collector of the new Roman Jericho. The city also figures in the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:30-37).<\/p>\n<h5>Postbiblical Record<\/h5>\n<p>While ancient Jericho was of small consequence after its destruction under Joshua, the Jericho of Herod was a city of beauty and importance. But even this city fell into decay with the decline of Roman influence in the Middle East. Most of what we know of the city until modern times comes from the writings of pilgrims to the Holy Land. They usually report seeing certain things of biblical significance, such as the tree that Zacchaeus climbed, but they also report that Jericho was a squalid, wretched Muslim village. And such it has been until relatively recent times, when it grew in size and importance as a major West Bank city.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JERICHO Ancient city on the west side of the Jordan River. The name Jericho may be connected to the ancient name of the Canaanite moon god. The Hebrew words for moon, month, new moon, and Jericho are very similar. Others associate it with the word for spirit or smell, assuming that the pleasant fragrances of the fruits and spices that grew in this oasis occasioned the name of the place. The OT occasionally calls it “the city of palm trees” (e.g., Dt 34:3; 2 Chr 28:15). Jericho was located on ...","summary_en":"JERICHO Ancient city on the west side of the Jordan River. The name Jericho may be connected to the ancient name of the Canaanite moon god. The Hebrew words for moon, month, new moon, and Jericho are very similar. Others associate it with the word for spirit or smell, assuming that the pleasant fragrances of the fruits and spices that grew in this oasis occasioned the name of the place. The OT occasionally calls it “the city of palm trees” (e.g., Dt 34:3; 2 Chr 28:15). Jericho was located on ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27291,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Neighbor","title_en":"Neighbor","content_ro":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","summary_en":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28826,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Parable","title_en":"Parable","content_ro":"<h3>Parable<\/h3>\n<p>A particular form of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• History of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of “Parable”<\/p>\n<p>• The Purpose of Parables<\/p>\n<p>• The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>An understanding of parables is essential if one is to understand the teaching of Jesus, since the parables make up approximately 35 percent of his recorded sayings. At no point are the vitality, relevance, and appropriateness of his teaching so clear as they are in his parables. While the parable form is not unique to Jesus, he was certainly a master at using parables as a way of teaching. The parables are not merely illustrations for Jesus’ preaching; they <em>are<\/em> the preaching, at least to a great extent. Nor are they simple stories; they have been truly described as both “works of art” and “weapons of warfare.” How one interprets the parables is not as easy a task as one might think. The way one understands the nature of a parable and the essence of Jesus’ message obviously will determine the method and content of interpretation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoryofInterpretation\">History of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>A great deal of insight can be obtained by following the course of treatment the parables have received over the centuries. Not surprisingly, they have been subjected to radically different approaches. But the questions that underlie all interpretations are these: (1) How much of the parable is really significant—all the details or only one point? (2) What is the meaning of the parable in the teaching of Jesus? (3) Of what relevance is the parable to the interpreter?<\/p>\n<h5>The Allegorizing Approach<\/h5>\n<p>From the second century even to the present, many people have allegorized the parables. In effect, they have said that every detail in the account is significant and that the meaning and relevance of a parable are to be found in the way it portrays Christian theology. This method, often identified as the Alexandrian school of interpretation, is best illustrated by a classic example that comes from Augustine (<span>AD<\/span> 354–430), the scholar who, despite his allegorizing, was a great theologian. His interpretation of the parable of the good Samaritan views Christ as the good Samaritan, the oil as the comfort of good hope, the animal as the flesh of the Incarnation, the inn as the church, and the innkeeper as the apostle Paul (to say nothing of the other details). Obviously, this interpretation has nothing in common with Jesus’ intention but rather reads into the story preconceived ideas of the interpreter. Such an approach can sound good theologically, but it prohibits the hearing of the Word of God. Medieval interpreters went even further than the allegorizing approach by finding multiple meanings in the text. Usually four were listed: (1) the literal meaning; (2) an allegorical meaning relating to Christian theology; (3) a moral meaning giving direction for daily life; (4) a heavenly meaning indicating something about future life.<\/p>\n<p>Not all of the church was dominated by such allegorizing interpretations. The school of Antioch was known for its commonsense approach to hearing the text. However, its influence was limited when compared to the Alexandrian school and, apart from notable exceptions, most of the church’s efforts at understanding the parables over the centuries have involved allegorizing.<\/p>\n<h5>The Approach of Adolph Julicher (1867–1938)<\/h5>\n<p>Julicher was a German scholar who published two volumes on the parables toward the end of the 19th century. His major contribution was the wholesale rejection of allegorizing as a means of interpreting the parables. In his reaction against allegorizing, Julicher went to the opposite extreme to say that a parable of Jesus has only one point of contact between the story and the fact being portrayed. He believed that this one point alone is important in interpretation and that it will usually be a general religious statement. Julicher went so far as to say that not only was allegorizing wrong but that Jesus did not use allegories, since they tend to hide rather than reveal. He said that any allegory appearing in the NT comes from the writers of the Gospels rather than Jesus. Julicher was correct to reject allegorizing (i.e., making an allegory of what was not intended to be allegory), but the rejection of allegory itself as a legitimate means of communication for Jesus is unfounded.<\/p>\n<h5>The Historical Approach<\/h5>\n<p>Twentieth-century study of the parables, particularly the work of C. H. Dodd (1884–1973) and Joachim Jeremias, has rightly emphasized the historical context in which the parables were originally told. Focus is placed on cultural factors that help in understanding the details of the parables and on the context of Jesus’ original preaching about the kingdom of God. Usually this approach has assumed that the first-century church changed the original thrust of some of the parables to meet her own needs, and consequently various procedures have been proposed to recover the original intent. It is true that the parables have been shaped, edited, and collected in units by the Gospel writers (note, e.g., Matthew’s collection of eight parables in Mt 13:1-52). Also, the aim of an interpreter should be to hear the parables as they were originally intended by Jesus and as his original audience heard them. The attempt to go behind the Gospel accounts, however, is a delicate task, and some of the procedures proposed for doing so need to be questioned. Notice must be taken of the way each of the Gospel writers has used his material, but the extent to which one can go behind the Gospels is limited.<\/p>\n<h5>Modern Trends in Parable Research<\/h5>\n<p>In the past few decades a number of attempts to interpret the parables have suggested new avenues of approach. Basically these new approaches have been somewhat dissatisfied with (although appreciative of) both Julicher and the historical approach in that both limit the impact of the parables on today’s reader. Julicher reduced Jesus’ teaching to pious moralisms, and the historical approach tended to focus on 2,000 years ago while ignoring both the artistic and psychological features of the parables. Consequently, numerous attempts have been made to convey the same impact the parables had for the original hearers to today’s hearers. Increasingly, less focus is placed on the historical meaning of the parables and more emphasis is placed on their artistic, existential, and poetic effect. Jesus’ parables are regarded as works of art that can be regarded as open-ended as far as meaning is concerned. A parable, then, would have an original meaning and the potential for a series of further possible meanings. While the original meaning would provide some control for reinterpretation, these approaches are not bound by the author’s intention.<\/p>\n<p>A great deal can be learned from modern approaches, especially from their concern to make sure that the parables speak to our day with their original vitality. However, there is also the danger of abusing the parables in a way similar to earlier mistreatments. Those allegorizing the parables in the history of the church were not bound by the meaning of Jesus and found their own meaning. Modern interpreters, too, can find their own meaning, and even though the explanations may sound convincing (as no doubt Augustine’s did to his hearers), they will not be a communication of the Word of God. If God and his ways are revealed by Jesus, then we err if we do not hear his parables as they were intended in their original context. There is indeed a dynamic interaction between the text and the interpreter, but the interpreter is brought to a moment of truth most effectively when the Spirit confronts him or her with the parable as Jesus intended it for his hearers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofParable\">The Meaning of “Parable”<\/p>\n<p>The usual definition of a parable as “an earthly story with a heavenly meaning” will not suffice for understanding Jesus’ parables. Nor are parables merely comparisons or illustrations of what Jesus wanted to say. The situation is much more complex with regard to the biblical meaning of the word “parable.” In fact, one must distinguish between three uses of the word “parable” in biblical studies.<\/p>\n<p>First, one should be aware that the Greek word for parable and its Hebrew counterpart are both broad terms and can be used for anything from a proverb to a full-blown allegory, including a riddle, a dark saying, an illustration, a contrast, or a story. For example, the Greek word for parable is used in Luke 4:23 with reference to the saying “physician, heal yourself” and most translations render it as “proverb.” In Mark 3:23 “parables” is used with reference to the riddles Jesus asks the scribes, such as “How can Satan cast out Satan?” Similarly, Mark 13:28 uses “parable” of a simple illustration. In Luke 18:2-5 the unjust judge is <em>contrasted<\/em> with God, who brings justice quickly. If one compares the Hebrew OT and the Septuagint (an ancient Greek translation of the OT), the word for parable is used most frequently with reference to a proverb or dark saying. The broad meaning of “parable,” then, can refer to any of these methods used to stimulate thought.<\/p>\n<p>Second, “parable” can be used of any story with two levels of meaning (literal and figurative) that functions as religious and ethical speech.<\/p>\n<p>Third, “parable” can be used technically in modern studies to distinguish it from other types of stories, such as similitudes, exemplary stories, and allegories. In this case a parable is a fictitious story that narrates a particular event and is usually told in the past tense (e.g., the parable of the lost son). A similitude, however, is a comparison that relates a typical or recurring event in real life and is usually told in the present tense (e.g., Mt 13:31-32). An exemplary story is not a comparison at all; rather, it presents character traits as either positive or negative examples to be imitated or avoided. Usually four exemplary stories are identified: the good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-35), the rich fool (12:16-20), the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31), and the Pharisee and the tax collector (18:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>Allegory is the most difficult to define and has caused considerable debate. Usually allegory is defined as “a series of related metaphors.” A metaphor is an implied comparison that does not use “like” or “as.” This definition is used broadly, but it is not entirely satisfactory for two reasons: (1) It does not indicate whether obscurity is an essential element in allegory. Some view allegory as needing to be decoded and as being understandable only to a select few. If, however, the allegory uses customary metaphors that all could understand, it would not be obscure. (2) It does not specify how much of the story is important as related metaphors. If there were only two or three related metaphors, would the story be an allegory? At the other extreme, do minor details in the story (such as the three levels of harvest in the parable of the sower) have significance? An example of an allegory would be the parable of the sower.<\/p>\n<p>This raises the problem of the difference between a parable and an allegory—a frequently debated issue. On definitions one and two above, allegory is included in parable. But on definition three, a distinction is made between them because a parable is not a series of related metaphors. The details of the story of the lost son (the swine, the far country, etc.) do not stand for something else as they would if they were in an allegory but rather convey in dramatic terms the depths to which the son had sunk. However, a parable is <em>not<\/em> thereby limited to one point of comparison between the story and the fact being portrayed. There may be several items that need to be mentioned from a particular parable. The parable of the lost son emphasizes the rejoicing that takes place at repentance (note the repetition of this theme in Lk 15:24, 32), but the receptivity of the father obviously parallels the grace of God and the younger and elder sons reflect sinners and religious authorities, respectively. The distinction between parable and allegory is vague at best and will vary, depending on what definitions are assigned the terms. One should note that what can be said about parable usually can also be said about allegory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposeofParables\">The Purpose of Parables<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of parables and a description of their characteristics will assist understanding. The parables focus on God and his kingdom and in doing so reveal what kind of God he is, by what principles he works, and what he expects of humanity. Because of the focus on the kingdom, some of the parables reveal many aspects of Jesus’ mission as well (note the parable of the wicked tenants in Mt 21:33-41).<\/p>\n<p>The following characteristics of parables should be observed: (1) Parables are usually concise and symmetrical. Items are presented in twos or threes with an economy of words. Unnecessary people, motives, and details are usually omitted. (2) The features in the story are taken from everyday life, and the metaphors used are frequently common enough that they set up a context for understanding. For example, the discussion of an owner and his vineyard would naturally make hearers think of God and his people because of the OT use of those images. (3) Even though the parables speak in terms of everyday life, often they contain elements of surprise or hyperbole (an exaggeration used as a figure of speech). The parable of the good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-35) introduces a Samaritan in the story where one would probably expect a layperson. The parable of the unforgiving servant (Mt 18:23-34) puts the debt of the first servant at $10 million, an unbelievable sum in that day. (4) Parables require their hearers to pass judgment on the events of the story and, having done so, to realize that they must make a similar judgment in their own lives. The classic example is the parable of Nathan to David (2 Sm 12:1-7), where David judges the man in the story as worthy of death and then is told that he is the man. Because they force one to decide, to come to a moment of truth, the parables force their hearers to live in the present without resting on the laurels of the past or waiting for the future. The parables are the result of a mind that sees truth in concrete pictures rather than abstractions, and they teach that truth in such a compelling manner that the hearer cannot escape it.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReasonJesusTaughtinParables\">The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables<\/p>\n<p>There is little doubt that Jesus taught in parables because they are both interesting and compelling and therefore are one of the most effective means of communicating. When one reads Mark 4:10-12, however, it seems that Jesus taught in parables in order to <em>keep<\/em> people from understanding so that they would not turn and be forgiven. It seems as well that there is a mystery that is given to the <em>in<\/em> group and that the <em>out<\/em> group is prohibited from learning. Herein is the meaning of the term “mystery.” Rather than being that which is not known or understood, as the word is used today, the biblical use of this word is usually for that which has been revealed by God and would not have been known had God not revealed it. The content of the mystery is not explained here, but from Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom elsewhere, it probably refers to the fact that the kingdom is present in Jesus’ own words and actions.<\/p>\n<p>The other factor crucial for understanding this passage is that the word “parable” in biblical usage has a broad meaning referring to any striking speech or dark saying intended to stimulate thought. Jesus did not spoon-feed his hearers; rather, he taught in such a way as to bring about a response, and where there was a response, he gave additional teaching. Consequently, it is not merely that parables are interesting, poetic, and arresting (as important as those characteristics are). In addition, parables stimulate thought and bring about response—if hardness of heart does not prevent it. It is as if Jesus were saying, “If you cannot hear what I am saying, I will reveal my thought in parables.” Where there is response to this initial teaching, additional information is given.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Parable<\/h3>\n<p>A particular form of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• History of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of “Parable”<\/p>\n<p>• The Purpose of Parables<\/p>\n<p>• The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>An understanding of parables is essential if one is to understand the teaching of Jesus, since the parables make up approximately 35 percent of his recorded sayings. At no point are the vitality, relevance, and appropriateness of his teaching so clear as they are in his parables. While the parable form is not unique to Jesus, he was certainly a master at using parables as a way of teaching. The parables are not merely illustrations for Jesus’ preaching; they <em>are<\/em> the preaching, at least to a great extent. Nor are they simple stories; they have been truly described as both “works of art” and “weapons of warfare.” How one interprets the parables is not as easy a task as one might think. The way one understands the nature of a parable and the essence of Jesus’ message obviously will determine the method and content of interpretation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoryofInterpretation\">History of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>A great deal of insight can be obtained by following the course of treatment the parables have received over the centuries. Not surprisingly, they have been subjected to radically different approaches. But the questions that underlie all interpretations are these: (1) How much of the parable is really significant—all the details or only one point? (2) What is the meaning of the parable in the teaching of Jesus? (3) Of what relevance is the parable to the interpreter?<\/p>\n<h5>The Allegorizing Approach<\/h5>\n<p>From the second century even to the present, many people have allegorized the parables. In effect, they have said that every detail in the account is significant and that the meaning and relevance of a parable are to be found in the way it portrays Christian theology. This method, often identified as the Alexandrian school of interpretation, is best illustrated by a classic example that comes from Augustine (<span>AD<\/span> 354–430), the scholar who, despite his allegorizing, was a great theologian. His interpretation of the parable of the good Samaritan views Christ as the good Samaritan, the oil as the comfort of good hope, the animal as the flesh of the Incarnation, the inn as the church, and the innkeeper as the apostle Paul (to say nothing of the other details). Obviously, this interpretation has nothing in common with Jesus’ intention but rather reads into the story preconceived ideas of the interpreter. Such an approach can sound good theologically, but it prohibits the hearing of the Word of God. Medieval interpreters went even further than the allegorizing approach by finding multiple meanings in the text. Usually four were listed: (1) the literal meaning; (2) an allegorical meaning relating to Christian theology; (3) a moral meaning giving direction for daily life; (4) a heavenly meaning indicating something about future life.<\/p>\n<p>Not all of the church was dominated by such allegorizing interpretations. The school of Antioch was known for its commonsense approach to hearing the text. However, its influence was limited when compared to the Alexandrian school and, apart from notable exceptions, most of the church’s efforts at understanding the parables over the centuries have involved allegorizing.<\/p>\n<h5>The Approach of Adolph Julicher (1867–1938)<\/h5>\n<p>Julicher was a German scholar who published two volumes on the parables toward the end of the 19th century. His major contribution was the wholesale rejection of allegorizing as a means of interpreting the parables. In his reaction against allegorizing, Julicher went to the opposite extreme to say that a parable of Jesus has only one point of contact between the story and the fact being portrayed. He believed that this one point alone is important in interpretation and that it will usually be a general religious statement. Julicher went so far as to say that not only was allegorizing wrong but that Jesus did not use allegories, since they tend to hide rather than reveal. He said that any allegory appearing in the NT comes from the writers of the Gospels rather than Jesus. Julicher was correct to reject allegorizing (i.e., making an allegory of what was not intended to be allegory), but the rejection of allegory itself as a legitimate means of communication for Jesus is unfounded.<\/p>\n<h5>The Historical Approach<\/h5>\n<p>Twentieth-century study of the parables, particularly the work of C. H. Dodd (1884–1973) and Joachim Jeremias, has rightly emphasized the historical context in which the parables were originally told. Focus is placed on cultural factors that help in understanding the details of the parables and on the context of Jesus’ original preaching about the kingdom of God. Usually this approach has assumed that the first-century church changed the original thrust of some of the parables to meet her own needs, and consequently various procedures have been proposed to recover the original intent. It is true that the parables have been shaped, edited, and collected in units by the Gospel writers (note, e.g., Matthew’s collection of eight parables in Mt 13:1-52). Also, the aim of an interpreter should be to hear the parables as they were originally intended by Jesus and as his original audience heard them. The attempt to go behind the Gospel accounts, however, is a delicate task, and some of the procedures proposed for doing so need to be questioned. Notice must be taken of the way each of the Gospel writers has used his material, but the extent to which one can go behind the Gospels is limited.<\/p>\n<h5>Modern Trends in Parable Research<\/h5>\n<p>In the past few decades a number of attempts to interpret the parables have suggested new avenues of approach. Basically these new approaches have been somewhat dissatisfied with (although appreciative of) both Julicher and the historical approach in that both limit the impact of the parables on today’s reader. Julicher reduced Jesus’ teaching to pious moralisms, and the historical approach tended to focus on 2,000 years ago while ignoring both the artistic and psychological features of the parables. Consequently, numerous attempts have been made to convey the same impact the parables had for the original hearers to today’s hearers. Increasingly, less focus is placed on the historical meaning of the parables and more emphasis is placed on their artistic, existential, and poetic effect. Jesus’ parables are regarded as works of art that can be regarded as open-ended as far as meaning is concerned. A parable, then, would have an original meaning and the potential for a series of further possible meanings. While the original meaning would provide some control for reinterpretation, these approaches are not bound by the author’s intention.<\/p>\n<p>A great deal can be learned from modern approaches, especially from their concern to make sure that the parables speak to our day with their original vitality. However, there is also the danger of abusing the parables in a way similar to earlier mistreatments. Those allegorizing the parables in the history of the church were not bound by the meaning of Jesus and found their own meaning. Modern interpreters, too, can find their own meaning, and even though the explanations may sound convincing (as no doubt Augustine’s did to his hearers), they will not be a communication of the Word of God. If God and his ways are revealed by Jesus, then we err if we do not hear his parables as they were intended in their original context. There is indeed a dynamic interaction between the text and the interpreter, but the interpreter is brought to a moment of truth most effectively when the Spirit confronts him or her with the parable as Jesus intended it for his hearers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofParable\">The Meaning of “Parable”<\/p>\n<p>The usual definition of a parable as “an earthly story with a heavenly meaning” will not suffice for understanding Jesus’ parables. Nor are parables merely comparisons or illustrations of what Jesus wanted to say. The situation is much more complex with regard to the biblical meaning of the word “parable.” In fact, one must distinguish between three uses of the word “parable” in biblical studies.<\/p>\n<p>First, one should be aware that the Greek word for parable and its Hebrew counterpart are both broad terms and can be used for anything from a proverb to a full-blown allegory, including a riddle, a dark saying, an illustration, a contrast, or a story. For example, the Greek word for parable is used in Luke 4:23 with reference to the saying “physician, heal yourself” and most translations render it as “proverb.” In Mark 3:23 “parables” is used with reference to the riddles Jesus asks the scribes, such as “How can Satan cast out Satan?” Similarly, Mark 13:28 uses “parable” of a simple illustration. In Luke 18:2-5 the unjust judge is <em>contrasted<\/em> with God, who brings justice quickly. If one compares the Hebrew OT and the Septuagint (an ancient Greek translation of the OT), the word for parable is used most frequently with reference to a proverb or dark saying. The broad meaning of “parable,” then, can refer to any of these methods used to stimulate thought.<\/p>\n<p>Second, “parable” can be used of any story with two levels of meaning (literal and figurative) that functions as religious and ethical speech.<\/p>\n<p>Third, “parable” can be used technically in modern studies to distinguish it from other types of stories, such as similitudes, exemplary stories, and allegories. In this case a parable is a fictitious story that narrates a particular event and is usually told in the past tense (e.g., the parable of the lost son). A similitude, however, is a comparison that relates a typical or recurring event in real life and is usually told in the present tense (e.g., Mt 13:31-32). An exemplary story is not a comparison at all; rather, it presents character traits as either positive or negative examples to be imitated or avoided. Usually four exemplary stories are identified: the good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-35), the rich fool (12:16-20), the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31), and the Pharisee and the tax collector (18:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>Allegory is the most difficult to define and has caused considerable debate. Usually allegory is defined as “a series of related metaphors.” A metaphor is an implied comparison that does not use “like” or “as.” This definition is used broadly, but it is not entirely satisfactory for two reasons: (1) It does not indicate whether obscurity is an essential element in allegory. Some view allegory as needing to be decoded and as being understandable only to a select few. If, however, the allegory uses customary metaphors that all could understand, it would not be obscure. (2) It does not specify how much of the story is important as related metaphors. If there were only two or three related metaphors, would the story be an allegory? At the other extreme, do minor details in the story (such as the three levels of harvest in the parable of the sower) have significance? An example of an allegory would be the parable of the sower.<\/p>\n<p>This raises the problem of the difference between a parable and an allegory—a frequently debated issue. On definitions one and two above, allegory is included in parable. But on definition three, a distinction is made between them because a parable is not a series of related metaphors. The details of the story of the lost son (the swine, the far country, etc.) do not stand for something else as they would if they were in an allegory but rather convey in dramatic terms the depths to which the son had sunk. However, a parable is <em>not<\/em> thereby limited to one point of comparison between the story and the fact being portrayed. There may be several items that need to be mentioned from a particular parable. The parable of the lost son emphasizes the rejoicing that takes place at repentance (note the repetition of this theme in Lk 15:24, 32), but the receptivity of the father obviously parallels the grace of God and the younger and elder sons reflect sinners and religious authorities, respectively. The distinction between parable and allegory is vague at best and will vary, depending on what definitions are assigned the terms. One should note that what can be said about parable usually can also be said about allegory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposeofParables\">The Purpose of Parables<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of parables and a description of their characteristics will assist understanding. The parables focus on God and his kingdom and in doing so reveal what kind of God he is, by what principles he works, and what he expects of humanity. Because of the focus on the kingdom, some of the parables reveal many aspects of Jesus’ mission as well (note the parable of the wicked tenants in Mt 21:33-41).<\/p>\n<p>The following characteristics of parables should be observed: (1) Parables are usually concise and symmetrical. Items are presented in twos or threes with an economy of words. Unnecessary people, motives, and details are usually omitted. (2) The features in the story are taken from everyday life, and the metaphors used are frequently common enough that they set up a context for understanding. For example, the discussion of an owner and his vineyard would naturally make hearers think of God and his people because of the OT use of those images. (3) Even though the parables speak in terms of everyday life, often they contain elements of surprise or hyperbole (an exaggeration used as a figure of speech). The parable of the good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-35) introduces a Samaritan in the story where one would probably expect a layperson. The parable of the unforgiving servant (Mt 18:23-34) puts the debt of the first servant at $10 million, an unbelievable sum in that day. (4) Parables require their hearers to pass judgment on the events of the story and, having done so, to realize that they must make a similar judgment in their own lives. The classic example is the parable of Nathan to David (2 Sm 12:1-7), where David judges the man in the story as worthy of death and then is told that he is the man. Because they force one to decide, to come to a moment of truth, the parables force their hearers to live in the present without resting on the laurels of the past or waiting for the future. The parables are the result of a mind that sees truth in concrete pictures rather than abstractions, and they teach that truth in such a compelling manner that the hearer cannot escape it.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReasonJesusTaughtinParables\">The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables<\/p>\n<p>There is little doubt that Jesus taught in parables because they are both interesting and compelling and therefore are one of the most effective means of communicating. When one reads Mark 4:10-12, however, it seems that Jesus taught in parables in order to <em>keep<\/em> people from understanding so that they would not turn and be forgiven. It seems as well that there is a mystery that is given to the <em>in<\/em> group and that the <em>out<\/em> group is prohibited from learning. Herein is the meaning of the term “mystery.” Rather than being that which is not known or understood, as the word is used today, the biblical use of this word is usually for that which has been revealed by God and would not have been known had God not revealed it. The content of the mystery is not explained here, but from Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom elsewhere, it probably refers to the fact that the kingdom is present in Jesus’ own words and actions.<\/p>\n<p>The other factor crucial for understanding this passage is that the word “parable” in biblical usage has a broad meaning referring to any striking speech or dark saying intended to stimulate thought. Jesus did not spoon-feed his hearers; rather, he taught in such a way as to bring about a response, and where there was a response, he gave additional teaching. Consequently, it is not merely that parables are interesting, poetic, and arresting (as important as those characteristics are). In addition, parables stimulate thought and bring about response—if hardness of heart does not prevent it. It is as if Jesus were saying, “If you cannot hear what I am saying, I will reveal my thought in parables.” Where there is response to this initial teaching, additional information is given.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Parable A particular form of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospels. Preview • Introduction • History of Interpretation • The Meaning of “Parable” • The Purpose of Parables • The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables Introduction An understanding of parables is essential if one is to understand the teaching of Jesus, since the parables make up approximately 35 percent of his recorded sayings. At no point are the vitality, relevance, and appropriateness of his teaching so clear as they are in his parables. ...","summary_en":"Parable A particular form of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospels. Preview • Introduction • History of Interpretation • The Meaning of “Parable” • The Purpose of Parables • The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables Introduction An understanding of parables is essential if one is to understand the teaching of Jesus, since the parables make up approximately 35 percent of his recorded sayings. At no point are the vitality, relevance, and appropriateness of his teaching so clear as they are in his parables. ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33673,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Samaritans","title_en":"Samaritans","content_ro":"<h3>SAMARITANS<\/h3>\n<p>Schismatic group from the Jews. The group resided north of Judea and south of Galilee in hostile tension with its Jewish neighbors. Jesus’ attitude toward this despised group radically contrasted with contemporary sentiment.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Origins of the Sect<\/p>\n<p>• Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews<\/p>\n<p>• Samaritan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus and the Samaritans<\/p>\n<p>• Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsoftheSect\">Origins of the Sect<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to determine precisely when the Samaritan sect arose and when the final break with Judaism occurred. The OT conception of the origin of the Samaritan sect is that they stemmed from repopulated foreign peoples whose worship of God was only a veneer for underlying idolatry. According to 2 Kings 17, the Samaritan sect arose from the exchange of peoples following Israel’s defeat by Assyria in 722 <span>BC<\/span>. Removing the Israelites from the land, the king of Assyria repopulated the area with conquered peoples from Babylon, Cuthah, and various other nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Samaritans offer a vastly different interpretation of their origin. They claim descent from the Jewish tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (see Jn 4:12) and hold that the exile of Israelites in 722 <span>BC<\/span> by Assyria was neither full-scale nor permanent. To account for the mutual hostility that developed between their group and the Jews, the Samaritan version holds that the Jews were guilty of apostasy, setting up heretical sanctuaries during the time of Eli, rather than staying with the only holy place on Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans therefore considered themselves true Israelites in descent and worship.<\/p>\n<p>From Assyrian records of this period, an exchange of population is in fact affirmed for the northern kingdom, but apparently a total deportation was not carried out (see 2 Chr 34:9). This would suggest that there were two elements in the land: first, the native Israelite remnant not exiled; and second, the foreign exiles who were gradually won over to the faith of the native residents, although syncretism no doubt existed during the early period of assimilation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RelationsbetweentheSamaritansandtheJews\">Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews<\/p>\n<p>The history of relations between the Samaritans—situated on the north around Mt Gerizim (their holy mountain), Shechem, and Samaria—and Jewish populations in Judea and then later in Galilee is one of fluctuating tensions. The ancient tension between the northern and southern kingdoms was revived with the return of exiles to Jerusalem under the Persian ruler Cyrus’s edict (c. 538 <span>BC<\/span>). The entire southern area was at the time being governed from Samaria in the north by Sanballat, a native ruler of Palestine under Persian authority. The return of exiles to Jerusalem, particularly with their intentions of rebuilding the Jerusalem temple, posed an obvious political threat to his leadership in the north (Ezr 4:7-24; Neh 4:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>Opposition was at first politically motivated but became religious when sometime later, possibly in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, a rival temple was erected on Mt Gerizim. An example of Jewish hostility toward the Samaritans about this time comes from Ecclesiasticus 50:25-26 (written approximately 200 <span>BC<\/span>), where the Samaritans are placed below the Edomites and Philistines in esteem and are termed a “foolish people” (cf. Test. Levi 7:2).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish disregard for the Samaritans was increased by the Samaritans’ lack of resistance to Antiochus Epiphanes’ campaign (c. 167 <span>BC<\/span>) to promote Hellenistic worship in the area. While part of the Jewish community resisted the transforming of the Jerusalem temple to a temple for Zeus (1 Macc 1:62-64) and eventually followed the Maccabees in revolt (1 Macc 2:42-43), sources suggest that the Samaritans did not (see 1 Macc 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>Poor relations came to a climax during the brief period of Jewish independence under the Hasmoneans, when the Jewish ruler, John Hyrcanus, marched against Shechem, conquering and destroying the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim (c. 128 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Under Herod the Great, Samaria’s fortunes improved, although animosity still continued between the Samaritans and Jews in Judea and Galilee. Holding the Jerusalem temple to be a false cultic center, and excluded from the inner courts by the Jerusalem authorities, a group of Samaritans desecrated the Jerusalem temple in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 6 by spreading human bones within the temple porches and sanctuary during Passover. Hostility toward Galilean Jews traveling through Samaria on the way to Jerusalem for various feasts was also not uncommon (Lk 9:51-53).<\/p>\n<p>This animosity continued in Jesus’ day. Both groups excluded the other from their respective cultic centers, the Jerusalem temple and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans, for example, were forbidden access to the inner courts of the temple, and any offering they might give was considered as if it were from a Gentile. Thus, although probably more accurately defined as “schismatics,” it appears Samaritans were in practice treated as Gentiles. All marriage between the groups was therefore forbidden, and social relations were greatly restricted (Jn 4:9). With such proscribed separation, it is not surprising that any interaction between the two groups was strained. The mere term Samaritan was one of contempt on the lips of Jews (8:48), and among some scribes it possibly would not even be uttered (see the apparent circumlocution in Lk 10:37). The disciples’ reaction to the Samaritan refusal of lodging (9:51-55) is a good example of the animosity felt by Jews for Samaritans at the time.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is less evidence for similar attitudes from the Samaritan side, we can assume they existed. It is probable to speculate, therefore, that the Samaritan shunning of hospitality in Luke 9:51-55 was not uncommon toward other Jews whose “face was set toward Jerusalem.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SamaritanBeliefs\">Samaritan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>The main beliefs of the Samaritans demonstrate both the close affinities with and obvious divergences from mainstream Judaism. They held in common with Judaism a strong monotheistic faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In contrast, however, there was an elevating of Mt Gerizim in the north as the only holy place for sacrifice, based on several divergent passages in Deuteronomy and Exodus in the Samaritan text. Mt Gerizim came to be identified with the site of Abel’s first altar (Gn 4:4), the site of Noah’s sacrifice after the Flood (8:20), the meeting place of Abraham and Melchizedek (14:18), the site of Isaac’s intended sacrifice (ch 22), and many other associations.<\/p>\n<p>The Samaritans held only the first five biblical books (Pentateuch) to be inspired and based their dogma and practice exclusively on these books. Such a narrow canon not only determined the direction of Samaritan theology but further separated them from contemporary Jewish thought. Moses, for example, was more highly exalted by the Samaritans than by the Jews. He was considered not only the chief prophet but also, in later thought, was described as the choicest of men, preexisting from Creation, interceding with God for Israel, and being to man “the light of the world.” The messianic hope of Samaritan theology also reflects this narrow canon. A Messiah from the house of David could not be anticipated, as no evidence for such could be found in the Pentateuch. Rather, the Samaritans awaited a “prophet like Moses” based on Deuteronomy 18:15-18. This anticipated prophet was also designated the “Taheb,” the Restorer, for he would in the last days restore proper cultic worship on Mt Gerizim and bring the worship of the heathen to that site.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear, therefore, that it was primarily the claim of supremacy for Mt Gerizim that separated this group theologically and culturally from their Jewish neighbors.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandtheSamaritans\">Jesus and the Samaritans<\/p>\n<p>The common Jewish perspective on Samaritans as being nearly Gentile was evidently held to some extent by Jesus as well. Jesus refers to the Samaritan leper as “this foreigner” (Lk 17:18) and prohibits his disciples, during their commissioning, from taking the message of the kingdom to either the Samaritans or the Gentiles (Mt 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the overwhelming evidence in the Gospels is that Jesus’ attitude toward the Samaritans differed radically from that of his Jewish contemporaries. When his disciples display the usual Jewish animosity in asking to have the “fire of judgment” rain down upon the inhospitable Samaritans, Jesus “rebuked them” (Lk 9:55). Moreover, he did not refuse to heal the Samaritan leper but honored him as the only one of the ten who remembered to give glory to God (17:11-19). So also in the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:30-37) Jesus clearly breaks through the traditional prejudices in portraying the despised Samaritan, not the respected Jewish priest or Levite, as the true neighbor to the man in need. Here as elsewhere, Jesus, in confronting his audience with God’s demand, breaks through traditional definitions of “righteous” and “outcast.”<\/p>\n<p>John 4:4-43 records not only the fascinating exchange between Jesus and the Samaritan woman but also Jesus’ subsequent two-day stay in the town of Sychar, a Samaritan city. Here we see Jesus not only risking ritual uncleanness by contact with the Samaritan woman at the well (vv 7-9) but also offering the gift of salvation to her (v 10) and the entire Samaritan town (vv 39-41). Through Jesus’ knowledge of her marital life (vv 16-18), the woman concludes he must be a “prophet.” Remembering that the Samaritans were expecting a “prophet like Moses” in the last days, it is possible that the woman was wondering if Jesus was their long-awaited prophetic Messiah (vv 19, 25-26). Jesus not only breaks through the rigid animosity of Jews toward Samaritans by doing the unthinkable in staying with this despised people, but he also accepts their faith in him as “Messiah” (v 26) and “Savior of the world” (v 42). Here, as with his association with the outcasts of Jewish society, Jesus redefines righteousness not according to descent or religious practice but according to faith in himself. In so doing, he shatters the racial and cultural distinctions of his day and lays the foundation for the gospel’s subsequent spread to the entire gentile world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SamariaintheMissionoftheEarlyChurch\">Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In the great commission given prior to his ascension, Jesus told his disciples to take the gospel to Samaria (Acts 1:8). The missionary activity of the early church did indeed include this region. When, following the martyrdom of Stephen, many Christians were forced to leave Jerusalem (8:1), one such Christian, Philip, spread the gospel in the city of Samaria (v 5). The response was so great to the miracles performed that Peter and John (representing the apostles in Jerusalem) were sent to investigate and to confirm the presence of the Holy Spirit among them. Evidence from the second century <span>AD<\/span> suggests, however, that Christianity did not gain a strong foothold among the Samaritans. For the most part, the Samaritans retained their own religion. A small remnant of the Samaritan sect continues to exist to this day, living near Mt Gerizim (Shechem) and in various cities in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament); Samaria.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SAMARITANS<\/h3>\n<p>Schismatic group from the Jews. The group resided north of Judea and south of Galilee in hostile tension with its Jewish neighbors. Jesus’ attitude toward this despised group radically contrasted with contemporary sentiment.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Origins of the Sect<\/p>\n<p>• Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews<\/p>\n<p>• Samaritan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus and the Samaritans<\/p>\n<p>• Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsoftheSect\">Origins of the Sect<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to determine precisely when the Samaritan sect arose and when the final break with Judaism occurred. The OT conception of the origin of the Samaritan sect is that they stemmed from repopulated foreign peoples whose worship of God was only a veneer for underlying idolatry. According to 2 Kings 17, the Samaritan sect arose from the exchange of peoples following Israel’s defeat by Assyria in 722 <span>BC<\/span>. Removing the Israelites from the land, the king of Assyria repopulated the area with conquered peoples from Babylon, Cuthah, and various other nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Samaritans offer a vastly different interpretation of their origin. They claim descent from the Jewish tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (see Jn 4:12) and hold that the exile of Israelites in 722 <span>BC<\/span> by Assyria was neither full-scale nor permanent. To account for the mutual hostility that developed between their group and the Jews, the Samaritan version holds that the Jews were guilty of apostasy, setting up heretical sanctuaries during the time of Eli, rather than staying with the only holy place on Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans therefore considered themselves true Israelites in descent and worship.<\/p>\n<p>From Assyrian records of this period, an exchange of population is in fact affirmed for the northern kingdom, but apparently a total deportation was not carried out (see 2 Chr 34:9). This would suggest that there were two elements in the land: first, the native Israelite remnant not exiled; and second, the foreign exiles who were gradually won over to the faith of the native residents, although syncretism no doubt existed during the early period of assimilation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RelationsbetweentheSamaritansandtheJews\">Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews<\/p>\n<p>The history of relations between the Samaritans—situated on the north around Mt Gerizim (their holy mountain), Shechem, and Samaria—and Jewish populations in Judea and then later in Galilee is one of fluctuating tensions. The ancient tension between the northern and southern kingdoms was revived with the return of exiles to Jerusalem under the Persian ruler Cyrus’s edict (c. 538 <span>BC<\/span>). The entire southern area was at the time being governed from Samaria in the north by Sanballat, a native ruler of Palestine under Persian authority. The return of exiles to Jerusalem, particularly with their intentions of rebuilding the Jerusalem temple, posed an obvious political threat to his leadership in the north (Ezr 4:7-24; Neh 4:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>Opposition was at first politically motivated but became religious when sometime later, possibly in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, a rival temple was erected on Mt Gerizim. An example of Jewish hostility toward the Samaritans about this time comes from Ecclesiasticus 50:25-26 (written approximately 200 <span>BC<\/span>), where the Samaritans are placed below the Edomites and Philistines in esteem and are termed a “foolish people” (cf. Test. Levi 7:2).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish disregard for the Samaritans was increased by the Samaritans’ lack of resistance to Antiochus Epiphanes’ campaign (c. 167 <span>BC<\/span>) to promote Hellenistic worship in the area. While part of the Jewish community resisted the transforming of the Jerusalem temple to a temple for Zeus (1 Macc 1:62-64) and eventually followed the Maccabees in revolt (1 Macc 2:42-43), sources suggest that the Samaritans did not (see 1 Macc 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>Poor relations came to a climax during the brief period of Jewish independence under the Hasmoneans, when the Jewish ruler, John Hyrcanus, marched against Shechem, conquering and destroying the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim (c. 128 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Under Herod the Great, Samaria’s fortunes improved, although animosity still continued between the Samaritans and Jews in Judea and Galilee. Holding the Jerusalem temple to be a false cultic center, and excluded from the inner courts by the Jerusalem authorities, a group of Samaritans desecrated the Jerusalem temple in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 6 by spreading human bones within the temple porches and sanctuary during Passover. Hostility toward Galilean Jews traveling through Samaria on the way to Jerusalem for various feasts was also not uncommon (Lk 9:51-53).<\/p>\n<p>This animosity continued in Jesus’ day. Both groups excluded the other from their respective cultic centers, the Jerusalem temple and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans, for example, were forbidden access to the inner courts of the temple, and any offering they might give was considered as if it were from a Gentile. Thus, although probably more accurately defined as “schismatics,” it appears Samaritans were in practice treated as Gentiles. All marriage between the groups was therefore forbidden, and social relations were greatly restricted (Jn 4:9). With such proscribed separation, it is not surprising that any interaction between the two groups was strained. The mere term Samaritan was one of contempt on the lips of Jews (8:48), and among some scribes it possibly would not even be uttered (see the apparent circumlocution in Lk 10:37). The disciples’ reaction to the Samaritan refusal of lodging (9:51-55) is a good example of the animosity felt by Jews for Samaritans at the time.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is less evidence for similar attitudes from the Samaritan side, we can assume they existed. It is probable to speculate, therefore, that the Samaritan shunning of hospitality in Luke 9:51-55 was not uncommon toward other Jews whose “face was set toward Jerusalem.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SamaritanBeliefs\">Samaritan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>The main beliefs of the Samaritans demonstrate both the close affinities with and obvious divergences from mainstream Judaism. They held in common with Judaism a strong monotheistic faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In contrast, however, there was an elevating of Mt Gerizim in the north as the only holy place for sacrifice, based on several divergent passages in Deuteronomy and Exodus in the Samaritan text. Mt Gerizim came to be identified with the site of Abel’s first altar (Gn 4:4), the site of Noah’s sacrifice after the Flood (8:20), the meeting place of Abraham and Melchizedek (14:18), the site of Isaac’s intended sacrifice (ch 22), and many other associations.<\/p>\n<p>The Samaritans held only the first five biblical books (Pentateuch) to be inspired and based their dogma and practice exclusively on these books. Such a narrow canon not only determined the direction of Samaritan theology but further separated them from contemporary Jewish thought. Moses, for example, was more highly exalted by the Samaritans than by the Jews. He was considered not only the chief prophet but also, in later thought, was described as the choicest of men, preexisting from Creation, interceding with God for Israel, and being to man “the light of the world.” The messianic hope of Samaritan theology also reflects this narrow canon. A Messiah from the house of David could not be anticipated, as no evidence for such could be found in the Pentateuch. Rather, the Samaritans awaited a “prophet like Moses” based on Deuteronomy 18:15-18. This anticipated prophet was also designated the “Taheb,” the Restorer, for he would in the last days restore proper cultic worship on Mt Gerizim and bring the worship of the heathen to that site.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear, therefore, that it was primarily the claim of supremacy for Mt Gerizim that separated this group theologically and culturally from their Jewish neighbors.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandtheSamaritans\">Jesus and the Samaritans<\/p>\n<p>The common Jewish perspective on Samaritans as being nearly Gentile was evidently held to some extent by Jesus as well. Jesus refers to the Samaritan leper as “this foreigner” (Lk 17:18) and prohibits his disciples, during their commissioning, from taking the message of the kingdom to either the Samaritans or the Gentiles (Mt 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the overwhelming evidence in the Gospels is that Jesus’ attitude toward the Samaritans differed radically from that of his Jewish contemporaries. When his disciples display the usual Jewish animosity in asking to have the “fire of judgment” rain down upon the inhospitable Samaritans, Jesus “rebuked them” (Lk 9:55). Moreover, he did not refuse to heal the Samaritan leper but honored him as the only one of the ten who remembered to give glory to God (17:11-19). So also in the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:30-37) Jesus clearly breaks through the traditional prejudices in portraying the despised Samaritan, not the respected Jewish priest or Levite, as the true neighbor to the man in need. Here as elsewhere, Jesus, in confronting his audience with God’s demand, breaks through traditional definitions of “righteous” and “outcast.”<\/p>\n<p>John 4:4-43 records not only the fascinating exchange between Jesus and the Samaritan woman but also Jesus’ subsequent two-day stay in the town of Sychar, a Samaritan city. Here we see Jesus not only risking ritual uncleanness by contact with the Samaritan woman at the well (vv 7-9) but also offering the gift of salvation to her (v 10) and the entire Samaritan town (vv 39-41). Through Jesus’ knowledge of her marital life (vv 16-18), the woman concludes he must be a “prophet.” Remembering that the Samaritans were expecting a “prophet like Moses” in the last days, it is possible that the woman was wondering if Jesus was their long-awaited prophetic Messiah (vv 19, 25-26). Jesus not only breaks through the rigid animosity of Jews toward Samaritans by doing the unthinkable in staying with this despised people, but he also accepts their faith in him as “Messiah” (v 26) and “Savior of the world” (v 42). Here, as with his association with the outcasts of Jewish society, Jesus redefines righteousness not according to descent or religious practice but according to faith in himself. In so doing, he shatters the racial and cultural distinctions of his day and lays the foundation for the gospel’s subsequent spread to the entire gentile world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SamariaintheMissionoftheEarlyChurch\">Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In the great commission given prior to his ascension, Jesus told his disciples to take the gospel to Samaria (Acts 1:8). The missionary activity of the early church did indeed include this region. When, following the martyrdom of Stephen, many Christians were forced to leave Jerusalem (8:1), one such Christian, Philip, spread the gospel in the city of Samaria (v 5). The response was so great to the miracles performed that Peter and John (representing the apostles in Jerusalem) were sent to investigate and to confirm the presence of the Holy Spirit among them. Evidence from the second century <span>AD<\/span> suggests, however, that Christianity did not gain a strong foothold among the Samaritans. For the most part, the Samaritans retained their own religion. A small remnant of the Samaritan sect continues to exist to this day, living near Mt Gerizim (Shechem) and in various cities in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament); Samaria.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SAMARITANS Schismatic group from the Jews. The group resided north of Judea and south of Galilee in hostile tension with its Jewish neighbors. Jesus’ attitude toward this despised group radically contrasted with contemporary sentiment. Preview • Origins of the Sect • Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews • Samaritan Beliefs • Jesus and the Samaritans • Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church Origins of the Sect It is difficult to determine precisely when the Samaritan sect arose an...","summary_en":"SAMARITANS Schismatic group from the Jews. The group resided north of Judea and south of Galilee in hostile tension with its Jewish neighbors. Jesus’ attitude toward this despised group radically contrasted with contemporary sentiment. Preview • Origins of the Sect • Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews • Samaritan Beliefs • Jesus and the Samaritans • Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church Origins of the Sect It is difficult to determine precisely when the Samaritan sect arose an...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55893,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:30-37<\/strong> Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:30-37<\/strong> Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:30-37 Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.","summary_en":"10:30-37 Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55894,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:30<\/strong> The road <em>from Jerusalem down to Jericho<\/em> dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:30<\/strong> The road <em>from Jerusalem down to Jericho<\/em> dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:30 The road from Jerusalem down to Jericho dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.","summary_en":"10:30 The road from Jerusalem down to Jericho dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83519,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:30-37<\/strong> Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:30-37<\/strong> Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:30-37 Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.","summary_en":"10:30-37 Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83520,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:30<\/strong> The road <em>from Jerusalem down to Jericho<\/em> dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:30<\/strong> The road <em>from Jerusalem down to Jericho<\/em> dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:30 The road from Jerusalem down to Jericho dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.","summary_en":"10:30 The road from Jerusalem down to Jericho dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111145,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:30-37<\/strong> Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:30-37<\/strong> Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:30-37 Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.","summary_en":"10:30-37 Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111146,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:30<\/strong> The road <em>from Jerusalem down to Jericho<\/em> dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:30<\/strong> The road <em>from Jerusalem down to Jericho<\/em> dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:30 The road from Jerusalem down to Jericho dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.","summary_en":"10:30 The road from Jerusalem down to Jericho dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138771,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:30-37<\/strong> Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:30-37<\/strong> Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:30-37 Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.","summary_en":"10:30-37 Jesus’ parable shows that true neighbors love even their enemies (10:29). Authentic spirituality is not based on ethnic identity or religious associations, but on love for God and for others.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138772,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:30<\/strong> The road <em>from Jerusalem down to Jericho<\/em> dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:30<\/strong> The road <em>from Jerusalem down to Jericho<\/em> dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:30 The road from Jerusalem down to Jericho dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.","summary_en":"10:30 The road from Jerusalem down to Jericho dropped 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) through rugged terrain where robbers often lay in wait for travelers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":31371,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Priests and Levites","title_en":"Priests and Levites","content_ro":"<h3>PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/h3>\n<p>Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levites fulfilled a variety of essentially religious duties and were equivalent approximately to the clergy in modern times. They were professional men and were supported for their full-time religious work.<\/p>\n<p>The role of the priesthood may be seen most clearly in the context of Israelite religion as a whole. At the heart of religion was a relationship with God; to be an Israelite or a Jew was to know and maintain a continuous relationship with the living God. This relationship found its outward expression in a variety of contexts: the covenant, the temple, worship, and every facet of daily life. Thus religion, understood as a relationship, had two perspectives: the relationship with God and that with fellow human beings. It had both a personal and a communal dimension to it. The priests were the guardians and servants of this life of relationship, which was at the heart of OT religion; all their functions can best be understood within the context of a relationship between God and Israel. The prophets, too, were servants of the covenant relationship. While the priests functioned as the normal servants of religion, the prophets’ role was more that of calling a delinquent people back to the relationship with God in times of crisis.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, there are frequent references to both priests and Levites; in a number of biblical texts, however, the distinction is not clear (see, e.g., Dt 18:1-8). From the scholarly point of view, the precise relationship between priests and Levites is a continuing problem that has not yet been fully resolved. In general terms, only the sons of Aaron were to assume the role of priests; all other Levites would have religious functions, though technically they would not be priests. While this distinction is clear in most biblical texts, in others there is lack of certainty and clarity. It is clear, however, that <em>priests<\/em> (Levites descended from Aaron) and <em>Levites<\/em> (other than the descendants of Aaron) all had professional religious duties to perform. The precise nature of those duties varied from time to time in the course of Israel’s history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>• The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>• The Priests<\/p>\n<p>• The Levites<\/p>\n<p>• The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheOriginsofthePriesthood\">The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood in Israel began during the time of Moses and Aaron. The exodus from Egypt was not only the liberation of a group of Hebrew slaves but also the birth of the nation of Israel. The nation that was born in the exodus was given its constitution in the covenant of Sinai. The law of this covenant established the foundations and origins of Israelite priesthood. It provides insight into the three basic categories to be considered: the high priest, the priests, and the Levites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHighPriest\">The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>Any large and complex organization requires a head or leader, and this was true also of the Hebrew priesthood (though in its early days it was a small organization). The covenant was established through Moses, the prophet, through whom God gave the offer and substance of the covenant relationship; religious life within the covenant was to be the primary responsibility of Aaron, who was the first and chief priest.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of Israel’s priesthood, it is probable that the high priest’s office was relatively informal; he was chief or leader among his fellow priests. The office was significant, nevertheless, and involved a special ritual of investiture, special clothing, and certain special responsibilities. While the high priest’s duties were similar in principle to those of other priests, he had certain exclusive responsibilities. To some extent, his duties were administrative, pertaining to all the priests of whom he had charge. But his position was more weighty than that of an administrator; just as all priests were the servants and guardians of the covenant relationship, so the high priest was chief servant and chief guardian. In his hands rested spiritual responsibility for the entire people of God, and therein lay the true honor and gravity of his position.<\/p>\n\n<p>This spiritual seniority of the high priest is seen most clearly in certain tasks he undertook within Israel’s life of worship. The clearest example may be seen in the annual observation of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). On that day alone, the high priest entered the Holy of Holies and, standing before the “mercy seat,” he sought God’s forgiveness and mercy for the whole nation of Israel (Lv 16:1-19). It is in that ceremony that Israel’s covenant faith is seen most clearly. Israel’s religion was one of relationship with a holy God, and human evil disrupted that relationship. While all worship and sacrifices throughout the year were concerned with the continuation of the relationship, the Day of Atonement was the most solemn day of the year, in which the attention of all the people focused upon the meaning of their existence. Life held meaning only if the relationship with God could be maintained; the high priest had the great honor and heavy burden of seeking God’s mercy for all Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The special clothing worn by the high priest was symbolic of the nature and importance of his office; although all the symbolism cannot be determined, some of it is made clear in the biblical text. There are three particular themes in the symbolism. The first is beauty. The sense of beauty emerges from the quality and design of all the items of clothing, together with the use of color and precious stones. But beauty is dominant in the breastplate; the Hebrew word translated approximately as “breastplate” has as its basic sense “beauty” or “excellence.” The clothing symbolizes beauty, while beauty describes the office; the two other themes associated with the symbolism bring out the excellence of the office.<\/p>\n<p>The second theme is the role of the priest as representative of Israel before God. This essential dimension of the office of the high priest is explicitly identified in the names of the tribes of Israel in the two onyx stones in the ephod, and in the 12 precious stones attached to the breastplate. The high priest entered God’s presence to seek deliverance from God’s judgment (the breastplate is identified with judgment; Ex 28:15) for his people and in order to keep the people constantly in God’s remembrance (v 12), as symbolized by the two onyx stones. The third theme is the role of high priest as the representative of God to Israel. This dimension of the office is seen in the Urim and Thummim, kept in the breastpiece, by means of which God made known his will to Israel. The high priest, Aaron, fully robed, was a splendid figure, and the splendor of his garments indicated the magnificence of the office with which he had been entrusted.<\/p>\n<p>The high priesthood was to be passed on within the family (for the high priest was expected to be a married man), although in later history the practice was not always adhered to. On Aaron’s death, the office passed to Eleazar, one of his four sons.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriests\">The Priests<\/p>\n<p>Priests took office not as the result of a particular vocation but by virtue of priestly descent. Thus the first priests were the four sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These four were ordained at the same time that Aaron was ordained high priest (Ex 28:1). Like him, they had special clothing, which was basically similar, though it lacked the distinctive garments of the high priest (the special ephod, the breastpiece, and the crown). The priesthood would be passed down through their sons.<\/p>\n<p>The sanctity of the priestly office was such that it was preserved from degeneration through specific laws. A man must be a descendant of Aaron to be a priest, but he was also required to meet a variety of other qualifications. He would not marry a divorcée or a former prostitute (Lv 21:7). If he was afflicted by certain kinds of disease or congenital defects, he was barred from priestly office (e.g., blindness, lameness, mutilation, being a hunchback or dwarf; vv 16-23). The principle involved was similar to that applying to animals used in sacrifice—only those free from defect or blemish were suitable for divine service.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of the priesthood there is some information provided in the biblical text concerning the specific duties of the priests. Eleazar had overall responsibility for the tabernacle and its offerings (Nm 4:16); assisted Moses in a number of duties, such as numbering the people and dividing the land (26:1-2; 32:2); and later served as an adviser to Joshua. Ithamar was responsible for the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 38:21) and supervised the families of the Gershonites and Merarites (Nm 4:28-33). Nadab and Abihu, however, died soon after their ordination as a result of a sinful act in their priestly duties (Lv 10:1-7), which may have been related in part to drunkenness (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Priestly duties, in general, fell into three areas (Dt 33:8-10). First, priests were responsible, in conjunction with the high priest, for declaring God’s will to the people. Second, they had responsibilities in religious education; they were to teach to Israel God’s ordinances and law (v 10). Third, they were to be the servants of the tabernacle, participating in Israel’s sacrifices and worship. There were a number of other duties that may have fallen to them, which they would have shared with the Levites in general.<\/p>\n<p>The priests, along with all other Levites, did not own any land, as did the other Israelite tribes. Their task was to be entirely in the direct service to God. The absence of land, however, meant that they could not support and feed themselves as could other men and women. Consequently, the law specified that they could be supported for their services by the people as a whole. They were to receive, from worshipers, portions of animals that were brought to the tabernacle, as well as corn, wine, oil, and wool.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLevites\">The Levites<\/p>\n<p>This term includes the priests, in a broad sense, for the sons of Aaron belonged to the tribe of Levi. For practical purposes, however, the Levites were those of the tribe other than the priests. The Levites also functioned in the service of the tabernacle, though they had a subordinate position. They, too, were professional men and were paid in money and in kind for their services. Though they did not inherit tribal territory of their own, there were a number of cities set aside for their use (Nm 35:1-8), and pasturelands were designated outside those cities for their livestock.<\/p>\n<p>The Levites were divided into three principal families, the descendants of Kohath, Gershon, and Merari (Nm 4). Each of these families had particular responsibilities with respect to the care and transport of the tabernacle. The sons of Kohath carried the tabernacle furniture (after it had been covered by the priests), the sons of Gershon cared for the coverings and screens, and the sons of Merari carried and erected the tabernacle’s frame. The priests, by contrast, were responsible for the transportation of the ark of the covenant. The role of each Levite, as servant of the tabernacle, was restricted; he undertook his professional duties between the ages of 25 and 50 (8:24-26).<\/p>\n<p>Although many of the duties of the Levites were of a mundane nature, they also had a very significant religious role. The law required that all the firstborn, including firstborn sons, be given to God, recalling the slaying of the firstborn at the exodus from Egypt. The Levites’ role in religion was that of being accepted by God in the place of the firstborn sons of Israel (Nm 3:11-13); their cattle, too, were accepted in place of the Israelites’ firstborn cattle. In the census taken in the time of Moses, the firstborn Israelites exceeded the number of the Levites, and a five-shekel redemption fee had to be paid into the priestly coffers for each person in excess (vv 40-51). The representative and substitutionary nature of the Levites can be seen in Israelite religion. Like the priests, they played a part in the larger activity of mediation between God and Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The law of Deuteronomy specifies a number of duties that may have fallen upon both priests and Levites (though the texts are ambiguous). These duties included participation in the activity of the law courts as judges, perhaps with special reference to religious crimes (Dt 17:8-9), taking care of the Book of the Law (v 18), controlling the lives and health of lepers (24:8), and participating directly in the conduct of covenant renewal ceremonies (27:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHistoryoftheInstitution\">The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>In theory, the covenant law of Moses determined the nature and course of the offices of priests and Levites for the future history of Israel. In practice, however, changing historical circumstances and changes in the shape of Israel’s religion and culture altered the shape of the priesthood and the role of the Levites from time to time. And even more significantly, the persons who held the offices shaped them and their effectiveness through their faithfulness or unfaithfulness.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood before the Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>In the time of Joshua, the priests continued to undertake their important task of carrying the ark of the covenant. The Levites assisted in the division and allocation of the newly acquired land among the Israelite tribes. In Joshua 21, there is a detailed list of the allocation of cities to both priests and Levites, in fulfillment of the earlier legislation. In the days of the settlement, beyond the Conquest, there is some evidence that the Levites took over the priestly duty of transporting the ark (1 Sm 6:15; 2 Sm 15:24).<\/p>\n<p>The writer of the book of Judges has recorded two stories that illuminate the lives of particular Levites. The first, the story of Micah (Jgs 17–18), describes the establishment of a local shrine in which Micah’s son was appointed as a priest (though he was not of Levite or Aaronic descent). Later, Micah hired an itinerant Levite to function as a priest in his shrine, though subsequently that Levite was persuaded to serve the tribe of Dan as a priest. It is difficult to fit the details of this story into the theoretical model of priests and Levites, though the story may illustrate the confused state of Israel’s religion at the time. What is particularly significant is that the role of the Levite-priest was primarily oracular (18:5-6). The second story in Judges is the rather horrifying account of a Levite and his concubine (ch 19). The story illustrates the moral decline and lack of law and order in Israel at the time, but it sheds little light on the role of the Levites.<\/p>\n<p>More information is provided about the priesthood during the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, immediately before the establishment of the monarchy. The tabernacle (by now probably a semipermanent structure) and the ark of the covenant were located in Shiloh. The priest in charge of the sanctuary in Shiloh was Eli, who may have been a descendant of Aaron’s son Ithamar. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also served as priests, indicating that the principle of family descent was still operative with respect to the priesthood. But although Eli was a faithful priest, his two sons abused the office.<\/p>\n<p>The precise role of Samuel in this period is unclear. He was primarily a judge and a prophet, but it is difficult to determine whether he was also a priest. In the historical narrative, he is not called a priest, though Psalm 99:6 might be interpreted to indicate his priestly office. There are a number of passages, however, that indicate he acted like a priest. For example, he offered sacrifices (1 Sm 7:9-10); as a young man he served in the sanctuary of Shiloh and wore an ephod (ch 2). Furthermore, one of the biblical genealogies implies priestly descent (1 Chr 6:23-30). Nevertheless, he is not normally identified as a priest and the introduction to his story refers to him as an Ephraimite, by descent from his father (1 Sm 1:1), not a Levite. If the priest is perceived as a permanent servant of the sanctuary, as was Eli, then it is clear that Samuel was not a priest. But the priestly role of Samuel may perhaps be related to the fact that his mother “lent” him to God (v 28) while he was still a boy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Time of David and Solomon<\/h5>\n<p>Several radical changes took place during the reign of David and Solomon. These were a result, primarily, of the establishment of a permanent temple in Jerusalem and the installation of the ark of the covenant there. During the time of Saul, the first king of Israel, the social structure was essentially the same as it had been in the time of the judges. Saul, as king, was a military leader, but his relationship to religion and the priesthood was not clearly determined.<\/p>\n<p>David changed the situation in many important respects. After his capture of the city of Jerusalem, he made that place the political and religious capital of his nation. The religious centrality of Jerusalem was assured by moving the ark of the covenant there, together with the tabernacle. Jerusalem now became the permanent location of the ark, and therefore the permanent center of religion; at the same time, the various regional shrines, which had developed in the premonarchical period, were gradually eliminated.<\/p>\n<p>These changes had numerous implications for the priesthood and the Levites. During David’s reign, there were two principal priests, Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar, a former priest of Nob, had joined David before his rise to power; he appears to have been a descendant of Eli, and through him of Ithamar, one of Aaron’s sons. Zadok’s background is less clear, though his lineage appears to go back to Aaron’s other son, Eleazar. These two priests are always named together in the texts describing David’s reign, and Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. Although neither is explicitly identified as high priest in the ancient texts, there is some evidence to suggest that Abiathar functioned as high priest (1 Kgs 2:35); in NT times, he is identified as such (Mk 2:26). Zadok, during David’s reign, may have been particularly responsible for the care of the ark of the covenant (2 Sm 15:24-25). These two priests had a significant position in David’s royal establishment; they may also have shared overall responsibility for the priests, whose lives were now centered on the Jerusalem temple.<\/p>\n<p>Much of David’s time was focused upon the preparations for building a permanent temple for God. In the preparation for the temple, and in its completion during the reign of King Solomon, the new activities of the Levites may be seen. (The construction of a permanent temple automatically removed their former responsibilities related to the care and transportation of the tabernacle.) Large numbers of Levites were employed as laborers in the actual building of the temple. Others found new tasks in the worship of God in the tabernacle during David’s reign and in the temple upon its completion. To the Levites, and especially to Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, was given primary responsibility for the music of worship; this involved not only singing but also the playing of a variety of instruments in the temple’s orchestra or band. The Levites had also a variety of other tasks; they worked as gatekeepers at the sanctuary, assisted the priests in the preparation of sacrifices, kept the sanctuary clean, and functioned as general administrative and legal officers (1 Chr 23:1-32). Other Levites functioned as bankers, with primary responsibility for the temple treasuries (26:20-28).<\/p>\n<p>Following David’s death, there was a dispute over the royal succession, from which Solomon emerged as the new king. During his reign, the temple was brought to its completion and the regular worship of the nation was conducted there. In the matter of succession, however, Abiathar had supported a losing candidate, and when Solomon was made king, he lost his important office in the royal court. During Solomon’s reign, the control of the priesthood passed into the hands of Zadok.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Divided Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>The great empire, which had been built by David and maintained by Solomon, collapsed after Solomon’s death. From the ruins, two new and relatively insignificant states emerged. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained Jerusalem as its capital and the temple as its center of worship. The northern kingdom, Israel, located its first capital at Shechem, from where it was later moved to Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>In the southern state of Judah, the priests and Levites continued to function normally within the Jerusalem temple. The office of high priest continued to be passed on by descent within the family of Zadok, who had held office in Solomon’s reign. The continuity of office in this family was to be retained down into the time of the second temple, when the Zadokite succession was interrupted about 171 <span>BC<\/span>. Nevertheless, for all the continuity of religion in Jerusalem, all was not well with religion in Judah, neither during the reign of its first king, Rehoboam, nor during the reigns of his successors. During Rehoboam’s reign, there was a decline in religion and also in the priesthood, when popular forms of religion were introduced as a result of foreign influence (1 Kgs 14:22-24). The history of the southern kingdom was marked by periods of religious decline followed by reform, often as a result of the activities of the prophets. The role of the priesthood was all too rarely one of spiritual leadership, and the priests themselves were often the subject of criticism by the prophets (e.g., Jer 2:8, 26).<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom, whose first king was Jeroboam I, inevitably had to introduce some radical changes in religion. Jeroboam could not recognize the temple of Jerusalem, partly because it lay outside his state and partly because it was intimately associated with the royal line of David. Jeroboam established two principal shrines in his kingdom, both of which were to retain importance during the relatively short life of the northern kingdom (200 years). The first was at Bethel, in the southern part of his kingdom near the border of Judah (it was only about 12 miles, or 19.3 kilometers, north of Jerusalem). The second shrine, or sanctuary, was at Dan, in the far northern part of his kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Both these sanctuaries had ancient associations with the Hebrew traditions. Bethel is referred to as early as the time of Abram (Gn 12:8), and the sanctuary at Dan is known from the history of the judges (Jgs 18). There may indeed have been priests and Levites still residing in these two places, descendants of the former servants of the sanctuaries. But Jeroboam established a non-Levitical priesthood to serve in these sanctuaries and in various smaller shrines or “high places,” thereby cutting off the religious tradition of the northern state even more radically from that of Judah. The royal sanctuary at Bethel, so close to the Jerusalem temple, may have been set up in deliberate competition with the Judean sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p>The history of the priesthood in the northern kingdom is no more impressive than that of Judah. Many of the prophets, including Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah, condemned the northern sanctuaries and their priests. Hosea was forceful in his condemnation: “As marauders lie in ambush for a man, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, committing shameful crimes” (Hos 6:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Those to whom the spiritual lives of the chosen people had been entrusted only rarely lived up to their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h5>Priests and Levites during and after the Exile<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom came to its end in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, defeated by the armies of Assyria, but religious life continued in Judah for a while longer. Eventually, the end of the southern state came about 586 <span>BC<\/span>; the defeat of the state by the Babylonians was accompanied by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Lam 2:20). The Babylonian commander took Seraiah, the high priest, and Zephaniah, his assistant, to Riblah, where, along with other officials, they were executed (2 Kgs 25:18-21). Then a policy of exile was established by the Babylonians; the most important and influential people of Judah were deported to Babylon, while the less significant were allowed to remain, for they were unlikely to cause trouble. Of those exiled from Judah, many may have been priests (Jer 29:1), for they were men of influence. By way of contrast, it seems likely that a much smaller number of Levites was exiled, reflecting perhaps their inferior social position.<\/p>\n<p>In the city of Jerusalem there was little normal religious life during the years of the exile; the altar had been destroyed and was not restored until after the exile. No doubt some kind of activity continued, but it was an impoverished form of religion. Most of the priests were in exile in Babylon, but they could not function, for there was no temple or sanctuary. Ezekiel implies that God himself was the only “sanctuary” for the exiles (Ez 11:16). Not until the return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple could the normal functions of priests and Levites resume.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian Empire was defeated, the new Persian conquerors instituted a policy whereby the Hebrew exiles could return to their homeland. Of those returning, 4,289 are designated as priests and members of priestly families, while only 341 were Levites (Ezr 2:36-42); the imbalance probably reflects the imbalance in the number of those exiled initially. Under Joshua (Jeshua), the priest, and Zerubbabel, work began on the restoration. The priests played a significant role in the first year of the return, in the restoration of the altar in Jerusalem, so that sacrifice and worship to God could resume. Once the altar had been restored, the work began on the temple itself in the second year of the return. In this work, both the priests and the Levites were involved, and the laying of new foundations for the temple began. When the foundation had been laid, both priests, in their vestments, and Levites, in their role as singers and musicians, participated in the ceremony of dedication (3:8-13). Again, when the temple had been rebuilt, both priests and Levites participated in the ceremony of dedication (6:16-18). The restoration, however, was concerned with more than buildings; it also involved a moral and religious component. Though priests and Levites helped in this task, they were also affected by it. Many, for example, had married foreign wives (9:1), and thus had to conform to Ezra’s reform laws.<\/p>\n<p>To some extent, the priests and Levites resumed their normal duties in the worship of the postexilic period. The priests were engaged in the conduct of the temple worship. The Levites assisted, as temple servants (Neh 11:3), as treasurers and collectors of tithes (10:37-39), and as instructors or teachers of the law of God (8:7-9). Nevertheless, the history of the priesthood after the exile is not free of blemish. Condemnation of the abuses of the priestly office was delivered by the prophet Malachi (Mal 1:6–2:9). Malachi catalogues a list of priestly evils reminiscent of the evil priests who lived during the time of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest continued after the exile among the descendants of Zadok, being held first by Joshua (Hg 1:1). The different political circumstances, however, changed the nature of the high priestly office. Whereas in the days of the monarchy the high priest was subservient to the king, there was no king, in the proper sense, after the exile. From a political perspective, the Jews were members of a province or colony; for practical purposes, they were a community based upon a common religion. The high priest was no longer subject to the secular authority of a Jewish king, but his religious authority was considerable, and in some ways his functions were similar to those of a king in preexilic times.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood in the Maccabean Period<\/h5>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, some changes took place in the priesthood, particularly with respect to the office of high priest, which marked the end of the OT era and set the background for the NT period. Judea, in the second century, was ruled by the Seleucid kings, who had inherited a portion of the massive Greek Empire established by Alexander the Great. The Judean province was controlled internally under the high priesthood, whose authority was received from the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\n<p>For the first three decades of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood remained with the Zadokite line of descent. The high priests were members of the (Zadokite) Oniad family: first, Onias III (198–174 <span>BC<\/span>); then Jason, brother of Onias III (174–171 <span>BC<\/span>). It was in the period of Jason that there began a series of events that would terminate the Zadokite tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Onias III had opposed the Hellenization policy of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), which threatened to undermine the Jewish faith. Antiochus replaced Onias by Jason, who in effect purchased the high priesthood from the Seleucid king. In purchasing the priestly office, Jason had set a dangerous precedent; although he was of Zadokite descent, his act implied that the office could be bought and that descent was not vital. The opponents of Jason, the Tobiads, were able to remove him from office and have their own candidate, Menelaus (who was not a Zadokite), appointed in his place. This act resulted in a civil war between those supporting Jason and those supporting Menelaus, and the war in turn culminated in ruthless repressive measures by Antiochus Epiphanes; there were massacres in Jerusalem, and the temple was desecrated (167 <span>BC<\/span>). The desecration of the temple led to the Maccabean revolt, as a result of which the Jews regained their independence for a short time. Menelaus retained the office of high priest until 161 <span>BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Alcimus (161–159 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>There then followed a period during which there was no high priest for seven years. The political climate, however, was such that it became unlikely that the Zadokite line would ever regain the high priesthood, which had been established in the time of King Solomon. The Maccabean Jonathan gained control of Jerusalem, and in 152 <span>BC<\/span>, with the approval of the Seleucid king, he was formally invested with the high priest’s robes of office. He was succeeded as high priest and ruler by his brother Simon in 143 <span>BC<\/span>, who also held the office with the approval of the Seleucids (Demetrius II). But in the third year of his reign (140 <span>BC<\/span>), the high priesthood of Simon received public approval in a great religious assembly, and the family of Simon became “high priest forever” (1 Macc 14:41-47). That event marked the real termination of the Zadokite tradition and the foundation of the Hasmonean line.<\/p>\n<p>The establishment of the high priestly office outside the Zadokite line did not go without challenge. It is probable that a sect within Judaism, now known as the Essenes, was born in reaction to the high priesthood of Simon. The Essenes (better known for the Dead Sea Scrolls) appear to have been founded by a Zadokite priest who rejected the authenticity and authority of Simon. Thus, in a limited sense, the Zadokite priests continued to survive.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriesthoodinNewTestamentTimes\">The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>In the early NT period, both priests and Levites continued to function within the Jewish religion. Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest belonging to the division of Abijah (Lk 1:5), and his wife was also of priestly descent. When Zechariah was visited by an angel, he was engaged at the time in priestly duties in the Jerusalem temple—various divisions of priests took responsibility for the temple services for a period of time and then returned to their homes (v 23), as another division took over. The distinction between priests and Levites is also maintained in the NT (Jn 1:19) and appears in Jesus’ parable concerning the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:31-32). Both priests and Levites were among the earliest converts to Christianity; Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36), and several priests responded to the proclamation of the gospel (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest is frequently referred to in the NT. Several high priests are named, the plurality of current and former holders of the office reflecting the nature of the position as an essentially political appointment (as distinct from its oldest definition, that of an office passing from father to son on the death of the father). The two most significant high priests in the NT are those who held office during the lifetime of Jesus. Annas was high priest about <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 15, but even after he ceased to hold the office formally, he continued to exert considerable influence through his son-in-law, the high priest Caiaphas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 18–36). Both were significant figures in the trial of Jesus. At a later date, Ananias, son of Nedebaeus, was high priest (c. <span>AD<\/span> 47–58) and president of the Sanhedrin during the time in which Paul was brought to trial.<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood held considerable authority in NT times. Most internal and religious matters in the Roman province of Judea were within the authority of the Sanhedrin, which functioned as a kind of provincial government, though its powers were limited in certain matters by Rome. Its membership included the ruling and former high priests and a large number of Sadducees, many of whom belonged to influential priestly families. This priestly influence in the Sanhedrin was indicative of the important role of the temple in Jewish life during the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 70, following the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a radical change came about in the significance of the priesthood in Judaism. The end of the temple removed in effect the purpose for the existence of the priesthood. Although the priesthood continued after a fashion until the Bar-Kochba rebellion in <span>AD<\/span> 135, its days were numbered after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Since the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, Judaism has developed without priests, and its course down to the present century has been charted by the rabbis, the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priesthood.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/h3>\n<p>Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levites fulfilled a variety of essentially religious duties and were equivalent approximately to the clergy in modern times. They were professional men and were supported for their full-time religious work.<\/p>\n<p>The role of the priesthood may be seen most clearly in the context of Israelite religion as a whole. At the heart of religion was a relationship with God; to be an Israelite or a Jew was to know and maintain a continuous relationship with the living God. This relationship found its outward expression in a variety of contexts: the covenant, the temple, worship, and every facet of daily life. Thus religion, understood as a relationship, had two perspectives: the relationship with God and that with fellow human beings. It had both a personal and a communal dimension to it. The priests were the guardians and servants of this life of relationship, which was at the heart of OT religion; all their functions can best be understood within the context of a relationship between God and Israel. The prophets, too, were servants of the covenant relationship. While the priests functioned as the normal servants of religion, the prophets’ role was more that of calling a delinquent people back to the relationship with God in times of crisis.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, there are frequent references to both priests and Levites; in a number of biblical texts, however, the distinction is not clear (see, e.g., Dt 18:1-8). From the scholarly point of view, the precise relationship between priests and Levites is a continuing problem that has not yet been fully resolved. In general terms, only the sons of Aaron were to assume the role of priests; all other Levites would have religious functions, though technically they would not be priests. While this distinction is clear in most biblical texts, in others there is lack of certainty and clarity. It is clear, however, that <em>priests<\/em> (Levites descended from Aaron) and <em>Levites<\/em> (other than the descendants of Aaron) all had professional religious duties to perform. The precise nature of those duties varied from time to time in the course of Israel’s history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>• The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>• The Priests<\/p>\n<p>• The Levites<\/p>\n<p>• The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheOriginsofthePriesthood\">The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood in Israel began during the time of Moses and Aaron. The exodus from Egypt was not only the liberation of a group of Hebrew slaves but also the birth of the nation of Israel. The nation that was born in the exodus was given its constitution in the covenant of Sinai. The law of this covenant established the foundations and origins of Israelite priesthood. It provides insight into the three basic categories to be considered: the high priest, the priests, and the Levites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHighPriest\">The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>Any large and complex organization requires a head or leader, and this was true also of the Hebrew priesthood (though in its early days it was a small organization). The covenant was established through Moses, the prophet, through whom God gave the offer and substance of the covenant relationship; religious life within the covenant was to be the primary responsibility of Aaron, who was the first and chief priest.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of Israel’s priesthood, it is probable that the high priest’s office was relatively informal; he was chief or leader among his fellow priests. The office was significant, nevertheless, and involved a special ritual of investiture, special clothing, and certain special responsibilities. While the high priest’s duties were similar in principle to those of other priests, he had certain exclusive responsibilities. To some extent, his duties were administrative, pertaining to all the priests of whom he had charge. But his position was more weighty than that of an administrator; just as all priests were the servants and guardians of the covenant relationship, so the high priest was chief servant and chief guardian. In his hands rested spiritual responsibility for the entire people of God, and therein lay the true honor and gravity of his position.<\/p>\n\n<p>This spiritual seniority of the high priest is seen most clearly in certain tasks he undertook within Israel’s life of worship. The clearest example may be seen in the annual observation of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). On that day alone, the high priest entered the Holy of Holies and, standing before the “mercy seat,” he sought God’s forgiveness and mercy for the whole nation of Israel (Lv 16:1-19). It is in that ceremony that Israel’s covenant faith is seen most clearly. Israel’s religion was one of relationship with a holy God, and human evil disrupted that relationship. While all worship and sacrifices throughout the year were concerned with the continuation of the relationship, the Day of Atonement was the most solemn day of the year, in which the attention of all the people focused upon the meaning of their existence. Life held meaning only if the relationship with God could be maintained; the high priest had the great honor and heavy burden of seeking God’s mercy for all Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The special clothing worn by the high priest was symbolic of the nature and importance of his office; although all the symbolism cannot be determined, some of it is made clear in the biblical text. There are three particular themes in the symbolism. The first is beauty. The sense of beauty emerges from the quality and design of all the items of clothing, together with the use of color and precious stones. But beauty is dominant in the breastplate; the Hebrew word translated approximately as “breastplate” has as its basic sense “beauty” or “excellence.” The clothing symbolizes beauty, while beauty describes the office; the two other themes associated with the symbolism bring out the excellence of the office.<\/p>\n<p>The second theme is the role of the priest as representative of Israel before God. This essential dimension of the office of the high priest is explicitly identified in the names of the tribes of Israel in the two onyx stones in the ephod, and in the 12 precious stones attached to the breastplate. The high priest entered God’s presence to seek deliverance from God’s judgment (the breastplate is identified with judgment; Ex 28:15) for his people and in order to keep the people constantly in God’s remembrance (v 12), as symbolized by the two onyx stones. The third theme is the role of high priest as the representative of God to Israel. This dimension of the office is seen in the Urim and Thummim, kept in the breastpiece, by means of which God made known his will to Israel. The high priest, Aaron, fully robed, was a splendid figure, and the splendor of his garments indicated the magnificence of the office with which he had been entrusted.<\/p>\n<p>The high priesthood was to be passed on within the family (for the high priest was expected to be a married man), although in later history the practice was not always adhered to. On Aaron’s death, the office passed to Eleazar, one of his four sons.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriests\">The Priests<\/p>\n<p>Priests took office not as the result of a particular vocation but by virtue of priestly descent. Thus the first priests were the four sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These four were ordained at the same time that Aaron was ordained high priest (Ex 28:1). Like him, they had special clothing, which was basically similar, though it lacked the distinctive garments of the high priest (the special ephod, the breastpiece, and the crown). The priesthood would be passed down through their sons.<\/p>\n<p>The sanctity of the priestly office was such that it was preserved from degeneration through specific laws. A man must be a descendant of Aaron to be a priest, but he was also required to meet a variety of other qualifications. He would not marry a divorcée or a former prostitute (Lv 21:7). If he was afflicted by certain kinds of disease or congenital defects, he was barred from priestly office (e.g., blindness, lameness, mutilation, being a hunchback or dwarf; vv 16-23). The principle involved was similar to that applying to animals used in sacrifice—only those free from defect or blemish were suitable for divine service.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of the priesthood there is some information provided in the biblical text concerning the specific duties of the priests. Eleazar had overall responsibility for the tabernacle and its offerings (Nm 4:16); assisted Moses in a number of duties, such as numbering the people and dividing the land (26:1-2; 32:2); and later served as an adviser to Joshua. Ithamar was responsible for the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 38:21) and supervised the families of the Gershonites and Merarites (Nm 4:28-33). Nadab and Abihu, however, died soon after their ordination as a result of a sinful act in their priestly duties (Lv 10:1-7), which may have been related in part to drunkenness (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Priestly duties, in general, fell into three areas (Dt 33:8-10). First, priests were responsible, in conjunction with the high priest, for declaring God’s will to the people. Second, they had responsibilities in religious education; they were to teach to Israel God’s ordinances and law (v 10). Third, they were to be the servants of the tabernacle, participating in Israel’s sacrifices and worship. There were a number of other duties that may have fallen to them, which they would have shared with the Levites in general.<\/p>\n<p>The priests, along with all other Levites, did not own any land, as did the other Israelite tribes. Their task was to be entirely in the direct service to God. The absence of land, however, meant that they could not support and feed themselves as could other men and women. Consequently, the law specified that they could be supported for their services by the people as a whole. They were to receive, from worshipers, portions of animals that were brought to the tabernacle, as well as corn, wine, oil, and wool.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLevites\">The Levites<\/p>\n<p>This term includes the priests, in a broad sense, for the sons of Aaron belonged to the tribe of Levi. For practical purposes, however, the Levites were those of the tribe other than the priests. The Levites also functioned in the service of the tabernacle, though they had a subordinate position. They, too, were professional men and were paid in money and in kind for their services. Though they did not inherit tribal territory of their own, there were a number of cities set aside for their use (Nm 35:1-8), and pasturelands were designated outside those cities for their livestock.<\/p>\n<p>The Levites were divided into three principal families, the descendants of Kohath, Gershon, and Merari (Nm 4). Each of these families had particular responsibilities with respect to the care and transport of the tabernacle. The sons of Kohath carried the tabernacle furniture (after it had been covered by the priests), the sons of Gershon cared for the coverings and screens, and the sons of Merari carried and erected the tabernacle’s frame. The priests, by contrast, were responsible for the transportation of the ark of the covenant. The role of each Levite, as servant of the tabernacle, was restricted; he undertook his professional duties between the ages of 25 and 50 (8:24-26).<\/p>\n<p>Although many of the duties of the Levites were of a mundane nature, they also had a very significant religious role. The law required that all the firstborn, including firstborn sons, be given to God, recalling the slaying of the firstborn at the exodus from Egypt. The Levites’ role in religion was that of being accepted by God in the place of the firstborn sons of Israel (Nm 3:11-13); their cattle, too, were accepted in place of the Israelites’ firstborn cattle. In the census taken in the time of Moses, the firstborn Israelites exceeded the number of the Levites, and a five-shekel redemption fee had to be paid into the priestly coffers for each person in excess (vv 40-51). The representative and substitutionary nature of the Levites can be seen in Israelite religion. Like the priests, they played a part in the larger activity of mediation between God and Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The law of Deuteronomy specifies a number of duties that may have fallen upon both priests and Levites (though the texts are ambiguous). These duties included participation in the activity of the law courts as judges, perhaps with special reference to religious crimes (Dt 17:8-9), taking care of the Book of the Law (v 18), controlling the lives and health of lepers (24:8), and participating directly in the conduct of covenant renewal ceremonies (27:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHistoryoftheInstitution\">The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>In theory, the covenant law of Moses determined the nature and course of the offices of priests and Levites for the future history of Israel. In practice, however, changing historical circumstances and changes in the shape of Israel’s religion and culture altered the shape of the priesthood and the role of the Levites from time to time. And even more significantly, the persons who held the offices shaped them and their effectiveness through their faithfulness or unfaithfulness.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood before the Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>In the time of Joshua, the priests continued to undertake their important task of carrying the ark of the covenant. The Levites assisted in the division and allocation of the newly acquired land among the Israelite tribes. In Joshua 21, there is a detailed list of the allocation of cities to both priests and Levites, in fulfillment of the earlier legislation. In the days of the settlement, beyond the Conquest, there is some evidence that the Levites took over the priestly duty of transporting the ark (1 Sm 6:15; 2 Sm 15:24).<\/p>\n<p>The writer of the book of Judges has recorded two stories that illuminate the lives of particular Levites. The first, the story of Micah (Jgs 17–18), describes the establishment of a local shrine in which Micah’s son was appointed as a priest (though he was not of Levite or Aaronic descent). Later, Micah hired an itinerant Levite to function as a priest in his shrine, though subsequently that Levite was persuaded to serve the tribe of Dan as a priest. It is difficult to fit the details of this story into the theoretical model of priests and Levites, though the story may illustrate the confused state of Israel’s religion at the time. What is particularly significant is that the role of the Levite-priest was primarily oracular (18:5-6). The second story in Judges is the rather horrifying account of a Levite and his concubine (ch 19). The story illustrates the moral decline and lack of law and order in Israel at the time, but it sheds little light on the role of the Levites.<\/p>\n<p>More information is provided about the priesthood during the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, immediately before the establishment of the monarchy. The tabernacle (by now probably a semipermanent structure) and the ark of the covenant were located in Shiloh. The priest in charge of the sanctuary in Shiloh was Eli, who may have been a descendant of Aaron’s son Ithamar. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also served as priests, indicating that the principle of family descent was still operative with respect to the priesthood. But although Eli was a faithful priest, his two sons abused the office.<\/p>\n<p>The precise role of Samuel in this period is unclear. He was primarily a judge and a prophet, but it is difficult to determine whether he was also a priest. In the historical narrative, he is not called a priest, though Psalm 99:6 might be interpreted to indicate his priestly office. There are a number of passages, however, that indicate he acted like a priest. For example, he offered sacrifices (1 Sm 7:9-10); as a young man he served in the sanctuary of Shiloh and wore an ephod (ch 2). Furthermore, one of the biblical genealogies implies priestly descent (1 Chr 6:23-30). Nevertheless, he is not normally identified as a priest and the introduction to his story refers to him as an Ephraimite, by descent from his father (1 Sm 1:1), not a Levite. If the priest is perceived as a permanent servant of the sanctuary, as was Eli, then it is clear that Samuel was not a priest. But the priestly role of Samuel may perhaps be related to the fact that his mother “lent” him to God (v 28) while he was still a boy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Time of David and Solomon<\/h5>\n<p>Several radical changes took place during the reign of David and Solomon. These were a result, primarily, of the establishment of a permanent temple in Jerusalem and the installation of the ark of the covenant there. During the time of Saul, the first king of Israel, the social structure was essentially the same as it had been in the time of the judges. Saul, as king, was a military leader, but his relationship to religion and the priesthood was not clearly determined.<\/p>\n<p>David changed the situation in many important respects. After his capture of the city of Jerusalem, he made that place the political and religious capital of his nation. The religious centrality of Jerusalem was assured by moving the ark of the covenant there, together with the tabernacle. Jerusalem now became the permanent location of the ark, and therefore the permanent center of religion; at the same time, the various regional shrines, which had developed in the premonarchical period, were gradually eliminated.<\/p>\n<p>These changes had numerous implications for the priesthood and the Levites. During David’s reign, there were two principal priests, Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar, a former priest of Nob, had joined David before his rise to power; he appears to have been a descendant of Eli, and through him of Ithamar, one of Aaron’s sons. Zadok’s background is less clear, though his lineage appears to go back to Aaron’s other son, Eleazar. These two priests are always named together in the texts describing David’s reign, and Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. Although neither is explicitly identified as high priest in the ancient texts, there is some evidence to suggest that Abiathar functioned as high priest (1 Kgs 2:35); in NT times, he is identified as such (Mk 2:26). Zadok, during David’s reign, may have been particularly responsible for the care of the ark of the covenant (2 Sm 15:24-25). These two priests had a significant position in David’s royal establishment; they may also have shared overall responsibility for the priests, whose lives were now centered on the Jerusalem temple.<\/p>\n<p>Much of David’s time was focused upon the preparations for building a permanent temple for God. In the preparation for the temple, and in its completion during the reign of King Solomon, the new activities of the Levites may be seen. (The construction of a permanent temple automatically removed their former responsibilities related to the care and transportation of the tabernacle.) Large numbers of Levites were employed as laborers in the actual building of the temple. Others found new tasks in the worship of God in the tabernacle during David’s reign and in the temple upon its completion. To the Levites, and especially to Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, was given primary responsibility for the music of worship; this involved not only singing but also the playing of a variety of instruments in the temple’s orchestra or band. The Levites had also a variety of other tasks; they worked as gatekeepers at the sanctuary, assisted the priests in the preparation of sacrifices, kept the sanctuary clean, and functioned as general administrative and legal officers (1 Chr 23:1-32). Other Levites functioned as bankers, with primary responsibility for the temple treasuries (26:20-28).<\/p>\n<p>Following David’s death, there was a dispute over the royal succession, from which Solomon emerged as the new king. During his reign, the temple was brought to its completion and the regular worship of the nation was conducted there. In the matter of succession, however, Abiathar had supported a losing candidate, and when Solomon was made king, he lost his important office in the royal court. During Solomon’s reign, the control of the priesthood passed into the hands of Zadok.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Divided Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>The great empire, which had been built by David and maintained by Solomon, collapsed after Solomon’s death. From the ruins, two new and relatively insignificant states emerged. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained Jerusalem as its capital and the temple as its center of worship. The northern kingdom, Israel, located its first capital at Shechem, from where it was later moved to Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>In the southern state of Judah, the priests and Levites continued to function normally within the Jerusalem temple. The office of high priest continued to be passed on by descent within the family of Zadok, who had held office in Solomon’s reign. The continuity of office in this family was to be retained down into the time of the second temple, when the Zadokite succession was interrupted about 171 <span>BC<\/span>. Nevertheless, for all the continuity of religion in Jerusalem, all was not well with religion in Judah, neither during the reign of its first king, Rehoboam, nor during the reigns of his successors. During Rehoboam’s reign, there was a decline in religion and also in the priesthood, when popular forms of religion were introduced as a result of foreign influence (1 Kgs 14:22-24). The history of the southern kingdom was marked by periods of religious decline followed by reform, often as a result of the activities of the prophets. The role of the priesthood was all too rarely one of spiritual leadership, and the priests themselves were often the subject of criticism by the prophets (e.g., Jer 2:8, 26).<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom, whose first king was Jeroboam I, inevitably had to introduce some radical changes in religion. Jeroboam could not recognize the temple of Jerusalem, partly because it lay outside his state and partly because it was intimately associated with the royal line of David. Jeroboam established two principal shrines in his kingdom, both of which were to retain importance during the relatively short life of the northern kingdom (200 years). The first was at Bethel, in the southern part of his kingdom near the border of Judah (it was only about 12 miles, or 19.3 kilometers, north of Jerusalem). The second shrine, or sanctuary, was at Dan, in the far northern part of his kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Both these sanctuaries had ancient associations with the Hebrew traditions. Bethel is referred to as early as the time of Abram (Gn 12:8), and the sanctuary at Dan is known from the history of the judges (Jgs 18). There may indeed have been priests and Levites still residing in these two places, descendants of the former servants of the sanctuaries. But Jeroboam established a non-Levitical priesthood to serve in these sanctuaries and in various smaller shrines or “high places,” thereby cutting off the religious tradition of the northern state even more radically from that of Judah. The royal sanctuary at Bethel, so close to the Jerusalem temple, may have been set up in deliberate competition with the Judean sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p>The history of the priesthood in the northern kingdom is no more impressive than that of Judah. Many of the prophets, including Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah, condemned the northern sanctuaries and their priests. Hosea was forceful in his condemnation: “As marauders lie in ambush for a man, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, committing shameful crimes” (Hos 6:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Those to whom the spiritual lives of the chosen people had been entrusted only rarely lived up to their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h5>Priests and Levites during and after the Exile<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom came to its end in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, defeated by the armies of Assyria, but religious life continued in Judah for a while longer. Eventually, the end of the southern state came about 586 <span>BC<\/span>; the defeat of the state by the Babylonians was accompanied by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Lam 2:20). The Babylonian commander took Seraiah, the high priest, and Zephaniah, his assistant, to Riblah, where, along with other officials, they were executed (2 Kgs 25:18-21). Then a policy of exile was established by the Babylonians; the most important and influential people of Judah were deported to Babylon, while the less significant were allowed to remain, for they were unlikely to cause trouble. Of those exiled from Judah, many may have been priests (Jer 29:1), for they were men of influence. By way of contrast, it seems likely that a much smaller number of Levites was exiled, reflecting perhaps their inferior social position.<\/p>\n<p>In the city of Jerusalem there was little normal religious life during the years of the exile; the altar had been destroyed and was not restored until after the exile. No doubt some kind of activity continued, but it was an impoverished form of religion. Most of the priests were in exile in Babylon, but they could not function, for there was no temple or sanctuary. Ezekiel implies that God himself was the only “sanctuary” for the exiles (Ez 11:16). Not until the return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple could the normal functions of priests and Levites resume.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian Empire was defeated, the new Persian conquerors instituted a policy whereby the Hebrew exiles could return to their homeland. Of those returning, 4,289 are designated as priests and members of priestly families, while only 341 were Levites (Ezr 2:36-42); the imbalance probably reflects the imbalance in the number of those exiled initially. Under Joshua (Jeshua), the priest, and Zerubbabel, work began on the restoration. The priests played a significant role in the first year of the return, in the restoration of the altar in Jerusalem, so that sacrifice and worship to God could resume. Once the altar had been restored, the work began on the temple itself in the second year of the return. In this work, both the priests and the Levites were involved, and the laying of new foundations for the temple began. When the foundation had been laid, both priests, in their vestments, and Levites, in their role as singers and musicians, participated in the ceremony of dedication (3:8-13). Again, when the temple had been rebuilt, both priests and Levites participated in the ceremony of dedication (6:16-18). The restoration, however, was concerned with more than buildings; it also involved a moral and religious component. Though priests and Levites helped in this task, they were also affected by it. Many, for example, had married foreign wives (9:1), and thus had to conform to Ezra’s reform laws.<\/p>\n<p>To some extent, the priests and Levites resumed their normal duties in the worship of the postexilic period. The priests were engaged in the conduct of the temple worship. The Levites assisted, as temple servants (Neh 11:3), as treasurers and collectors of tithes (10:37-39), and as instructors or teachers of the law of God (8:7-9). Nevertheless, the history of the priesthood after the exile is not free of blemish. Condemnation of the abuses of the priestly office was delivered by the prophet Malachi (Mal 1:6–2:9). Malachi catalogues a list of priestly evils reminiscent of the evil priests who lived during the time of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest continued after the exile among the descendants of Zadok, being held first by Joshua (Hg 1:1). The different political circumstances, however, changed the nature of the high priestly office. Whereas in the days of the monarchy the high priest was subservient to the king, there was no king, in the proper sense, after the exile. From a political perspective, the Jews were members of a province or colony; for practical purposes, they were a community based upon a common religion. The high priest was no longer subject to the secular authority of a Jewish king, but his religious authority was considerable, and in some ways his functions were similar to those of a king in preexilic times.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood in the Maccabean Period<\/h5>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, some changes took place in the priesthood, particularly with respect to the office of high priest, which marked the end of the OT era and set the background for the NT period. Judea, in the second century, was ruled by the Seleucid kings, who had inherited a portion of the massive Greek Empire established by Alexander the Great. The Judean province was controlled internally under the high priesthood, whose authority was received from the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\n<p>For the first three decades of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood remained with the Zadokite line of descent. The high priests were members of the (Zadokite) Oniad family: first, Onias III (198–174 <span>BC<\/span>); then Jason, brother of Onias III (174–171 <span>BC<\/span>). It was in the period of Jason that there began a series of events that would terminate the Zadokite tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Onias III had opposed the Hellenization policy of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), which threatened to undermine the Jewish faith. Antiochus replaced Onias by Jason, who in effect purchased the high priesthood from the Seleucid king. In purchasing the priestly office, Jason had set a dangerous precedent; although he was of Zadokite descent, his act implied that the office could be bought and that descent was not vital. The opponents of Jason, the Tobiads, were able to remove him from office and have their own candidate, Menelaus (who was not a Zadokite), appointed in his place. This act resulted in a civil war between those supporting Jason and those supporting Menelaus, and the war in turn culminated in ruthless repressive measures by Antiochus Epiphanes; there were massacres in Jerusalem, and the temple was desecrated (167 <span>BC<\/span>). The desecration of the temple led to the Maccabean revolt, as a result of which the Jews regained their independence for a short time. Menelaus retained the office of high priest until 161 <span>BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Alcimus (161–159 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>There then followed a period during which there was no high priest for seven years. The political climate, however, was such that it became unlikely that the Zadokite line would ever regain the high priesthood, which had been established in the time of King Solomon. The Maccabean Jonathan gained control of Jerusalem, and in 152 <span>BC<\/span>, with the approval of the Seleucid king, he was formally invested with the high priest’s robes of office. He was succeeded as high priest and ruler by his brother Simon in 143 <span>BC<\/span>, who also held the office with the approval of the Seleucids (Demetrius II). But in the third year of his reign (140 <span>BC<\/span>), the high priesthood of Simon received public approval in a great religious assembly, and the family of Simon became “high priest forever” (1 Macc 14:41-47). That event marked the real termination of the Zadokite tradition and the foundation of the Hasmonean line.<\/p>\n<p>The establishment of the high priestly office outside the Zadokite line did not go without challenge. It is probable that a sect within Judaism, now known as the Essenes, was born in reaction to the high priesthood of Simon. The Essenes (better known for the Dead Sea Scrolls) appear to have been founded by a Zadokite priest who rejected the authenticity and authority of Simon. Thus, in a limited sense, the Zadokite priests continued to survive.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriesthoodinNewTestamentTimes\">The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>In the early NT period, both priests and Levites continued to function within the Jewish religion. Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest belonging to the division of Abijah (Lk 1:5), and his wife was also of priestly descent. When Zechariah was visited by an angel, he was engaged at the time in priestly duties in the Jerusalem temple—various divisions of priests took responsibility for the temple services for a period of time and then returned to their homes (v 23), as another division took over. The distinction between priests and Levites is also maintained in the NT (Jn 1:19) and appears in Jesus’ parable concerning the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:31-32). Both priests and Levites were among the earliest converts to Christianity; Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36), and several priests responded to the proclamation of the gospel (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest is frequently referred to in the NT. Several high priests are named, the plurality of current and former holders of the office reflecting the nature of the position as an essentially political appointment (as distinct from its oldest definition, that of an office passing from father to son on the death of the father). The two most significant high priests in the NT are those who held office during the lifetime of Jesus. Annas was high priest about <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 15, but even after he ceased to hold the office formally, he continued to exert considerable influence through his son-in-law, the high priest Caiaphas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 18–36). Both were significant figures in the trial of Jesus. At a later date, Ananias, son of Nedebaeus, was high priest (c. <span>AD<\/span> 47–58) and president of the Sanhedrin during the time in which Paul was brought to trial.<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood held considerable authority in NT times. Most internal and religious matters in the Roman province of Judea were within the authority of the Sanhedrin, which functioned as a kind of provincial government, though its powers were limited in certain matters by Rome. Its membership included the ruling and former high priests and a large number of Sadducees, many of whom belonged to influential priestly families. This priestly influence in the Sanhedrin was indicative of the important role of the temple in Jewish life during the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 70, following the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a radical change came about in the significance of the priesthood in Judaism. The end of the temple removed in effect the purpose for the existence of the priesthood. Although the priesthood continued after a fashion until the Bar-Kochba rebellion in <span>AD<\/span> 135, its days were numbered after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Since the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, Judaism has developed without priests, and its course down to the present century has been charted by the rabbis, the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priesthood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRIESTS AND LEVITES Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levit...","summary_en":"PRIESTS AND LEVITES Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levit...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55895,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:31","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:31<\/strong> <em>a priest:<\/em> Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • <em>passed him by:<\/em> A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:31<\/strong> <em>a priest:<\/em> Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • <em>passed him by:<\/em> A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:31 a priest: Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • passed him by: A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.","summary_en":"10:31 a priest: Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • passed him by: A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83521,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:31","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:31<\/strong> <em>a priest:<\/em> Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • <em>passed him by:<\/em> A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:31<\/strong> <em>a priest:<\/em> Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • <em>passed him by:<\/em> A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:31 a priest: Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • passed him by: A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.","summary_en":"10:31 a priest: Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • passed him by: A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111147,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:31","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:31<\/strong> <em>a priest:<\/em> Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • <em>passed him by:<\/em> A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:31<\/strong> <em>a priest:<\/em> Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • <em>passed him by:<\/em> A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:31 a priest: Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • passed him by: A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.","summary_en":"10:31 a priest: Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • passed him by: A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138773,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:31","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:31<\/strong> <em>a priest:<\/em> Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • <em>passed him by:<\/em> A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:31<\/strong> <em>a priest:<\/em> Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • <em>passed him by:<\/em> A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:31 a priest: Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • passed him by: A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.","summary_en":"10:31 a priest: Priests were descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi (Exod 28:1-3). They served in the Temple and offered sacrifices to God. • passed him by: A priest or a Levite became unclean and unable to serve in the Temple if he touched a dead body. This priest was unwilling to risk ritual impurity by helping a person in desperate trouble.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"32":[{"id":55896,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:32","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:32<\/strong> <em>A Temple assistant<\/em> (literally <em>a Levite<\/em>): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:32<\/strong> <em>A Temple assistant<\/em> (literally <em>a Levite<\/em>): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:32 A Temple assistant (literally a Levite): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.","summary_en":"10:32 A Temple assistant (literally a Levite): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83522,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:32","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:32<\/strong> <em>A Temple assistant<\/em> (literally <em>a Levite<\/em>): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:32<\/strong> <em>A Temple assistant<\/em> (literally <em>a Levite<\/em>): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:32 A Temple assistant (literally a Levite): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.","summary_en":"10:32 A Temple assistant (literally a Levite): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111148,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:32","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:32<\/strong> <em>A Temple assistant<\/em> (literally <em>a Levite<\/em>): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:32<\/strong> <em>A Temple assistant<\/em> (literally <em>a Levite<\/em>): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:32 A Temple assistant (literally a Levite): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.","summary_en":"10:32 A Temple assistant (literally a Levite): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138774,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:32","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:32<\/strong> <em>A Temple assistant<\/em> (literally <em>a Levite<\/em>): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:32<\/strong> <em>A Temple assistant<\/em> (literally <em>a Levite<\/em>): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:32 A Temple assistant (literally a Levite): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.","summary_en":"10:32 A Temple assistant (literally a Levite): Levites were members of the tribe of Levi. They were not given a tribal homeland in Israel but were dedicated to God (Num 3:41, 45; 8:18; 35:2-3; Deut 18:1; Josh 14:3) as assistants to the priests in the service of the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"33":[{"id":7345,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Compassion","title_en":"Compassion","content_ro":"<h3>COMPASSION<\/h3>\n<p>Quality of showing kindness or favor, of being gracious, or of having pity or mercy. In the Bible, God is described as being like a compassionate father to those who revere him (Ps 103:13). Jesus Christ exemplified God’s compassion in his preaching and healing (Mt 9:36; 14:14), in his concern for the lostness of humanity (Lk 19:41), and finally in his sacrifice on the cross (Rom 5:8). The church is to demonstrate compassion as one facet of the love Jesus commanded (Mt 5:4-7; Jn 13:34; Jas 2:8-18; 1 Jn 3:18). In scriptural usage compassion is always both a feeling and the appropriate action based on that feeling.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, compassion describes one aspect of God’s covenantal relationship with his people. One of the Hebrew words translated “compassion” is derived from a root word meaning “womb,” thus comparing God’s love with maternal love. God’s compassion, however, went beyond simply feeling the emotion; it was always demonstrated by definite acts that testified to his covenant with Israel. In spite of Israel’s rebellions, God still had compassion on his people (2 Kgs 13:23; 2 Chr 36:15; Ps 78:38), as well as on all his creation (Ps 145:9). When Israel was chastised, the nation often feared that God had permanently withdrawn his favor (Ps 77:9; Is 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14; 21:7; Hos 13:14). Yet God’s compassion would revive, and he would restore his people (Dt 30:3; Ps 135:14; Is 14:1; 49:13; 54:7-8; Jer 12:15; 30:18; Mi 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, exactly reflected the Father’s compassion in his dealings with a fallen humanity. Jesus healed diseases and infirmities, cast out spirits, empowered others, and sent them out to do likewise. He fed hungry people and, in response to a mother’s grief, raised her only son from the dead. Following Jesus’ example, Christians are to show compassion in dealing with others. Jesus set forth the example in the parables of the Good Samaritan, who had compassion on a wounded traveler (Lk 10:33), and the Prodigal Son, whose father had compassion on him when he returned home (15:20).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul listed a number of qualities that the Colossian church “as God’s chosen ones” was to incorporate; the first was compassion (Col 3:12). It was to be an integral part of the concept of Christian community. The Greek word means literally “to be moved in one’s bowels.” The term points to the very core of one’s inner feelings, much as the term “heart” does today. One’s intense inner feelings should always lead to outward compassionate acts of mercy and kindness.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMPASSION<\/h3>\n<p>Quality of showing kindness or favor, of being gracious, or of having pity or mercy. In the Bible, God is described as being like a compassionate father to those who revere him (Ps 103:13). Jesus Christ exemplified God’s compassion in his preaching and healing (Mt 9:36; 14:14), in his concern for the lostness of humanity (Lk 19:41), and finally in his sacrifice on the cross (Rom 5:8). The church is to demonstrate compassion as one facet of the love Jesus commanded (Mt 5:4-7; Jn 13:34; Jas 2:8-18; 1 Jn 3:18). In scriptural usage compassion is always both a feeling and the appropriate action based on that feeling.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, compassion describes one aspect of God’s covenantal relationship with his people. One of the Hebrew words translated “compassion” is derived from a root word meaning “womb,” thus comparing God’s love with maternal love. God’s compassion, however, went beyond simply feeling the emotion; it was always demonstrated by definite acts that testified to his covenant with Israel. In spite of Israel’s rebellions, God still had compassion on his people (2 Kgs 13:23; 2 Chr 36:15; Ps 78:38), as well as on all his creation (Ps 145:9). When Israel was chastised, the nation often feared that God had permanently withdrawn his favor (Ps 77:9; Is 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14; 21:7; Hos 13:14). Yet God’s compassion would revive, and he would restore his people (Dt 30:3; Ps 135:14; Is 14:1; 49:13; 54:7-8; Jer 12:15; 30:18; Mi 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, exactly reflected the Father’s compassion in his dealings with a fallen humanity. Jesus healed diseases and infirmities, cast out spirits, empowered others, and sent them out to do likewise. He fed hungry people and, in response to a mother’s grief, raised her only son from the dead. Following Jesus’ example, Christians are to show compassion in dealing with others. Jesus set forth the example in the parables of the Good Samaritan, who had compassion on a wounded traveler (Lk 10:33), and the Prodigal Son, whose father had compassion on him when he returned home (15:20).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul listed a number of qualities that the Colossian church “as God’s chosen ones” was to incorporate; the first was compassion (Col 3:12). It was to be an integral part of the concept of Christian community. The Greek word means literally “to be moved in one’s bowels.” The term points to the very core of one’s inner feelings, much as the term “heart” does today. One’s intense inner feelings should always lead to outward compassionate acts of mercy and kindness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMPASSION Quality of showing kindness or favor, of being gracious, or of having pity or mercy. In the Bible, God is described as being like a compassionate father to those who revere him (Ps 103:13). Jesus Christ exemplified God’s compassion in his preaching and healing (Mt 9:36; 14:14), in his concern for the lostness of humanity (Lk 19:41), and finally in his sacrifice on the cross (Rom 5:8). The church is to demonstrate compassion as one facet of the love Jesus commanded (Mt 5:4-7; Jn 13:...","summary_en":"COMPASSION Quality of showing kindness or favor, of being gracious, or of having pity or mercy. In the Bible, God is described as being like a compassionate father to those who revere him (Ps 103:13). Jesus Christ exemplified God’s compassion in his preaching and healing (Mt 9:36; 14:14), in his concern for the lostness of humanity (Lk 19:41), and finally in his sacrifice on the cross (Rom 5:8). The church is to demonstrate compassion as one facet of the love Jesus commanded (Mt 5:4-7; Jn 13:...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55897,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:33","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:33<\/strong> <em>a despised Samaritan:<\/em> This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used their own version of the Pentateuch (Genesis—Deuteronomy) as their Scripture. Hatred between the two increased dramatically when the Jewish king John Hyrcanus attacked the Samaritans and destroyed the temple on Mount Gerizim (about 128 <span>BC<\/span>). In this context of mutual animosity, no first-century Jew would expect a despised Samaritan to help a wounded Jew. But in God’s Kingdom, a despised foreigner becomes a helping neighbor!<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:33<\/strong> <em>a despised Samaritan:<\/em> This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used their own version of the Pentateuch (Genesis—Deuteronomy) as their Scripture. Hatred between the two increased dramatically when the Jewish king John Hyrcanus attacked the Samaritans and destroyed the temple on Mount Gerizim (about 128 <span>BC<\/span>). In this context of mutual animosity, no first-century Jew would expect a despised Samaritan to help a wounded Jew. But in God’s Kingdom, a despised foreigner becomes a helping neighbor!<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:33 a despised Samaritan: This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used th...","summary_en":"10:33 a despised Samaritan: This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used th...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83523,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:33","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:33<\/strong> <em>a despised Samaritan:<\/em> This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used their own version of the Pentateuch (Genesis—Deuteronomy) as their Scripture. Hatred between the two increased dramatically when the Jewish king John Hyrcanus attacked the Samaritans and destroyed the temple on Mount Gerizim (about 128 <span>BC<\/span>). In this context of mutual animosity, no first-century Jew would expect a despised Samaritan to help a wounded Jew. But in God’s Kingdom, a despised foreigner becomes a helping neighbor!<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:33<\/strong> <em>a despised Samaritan:<\/em> This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used their own version of the Pentateuch (Genesis—Deuteronomy) as their Scripture. Hatred between the two increased dramatically when the Jewish king John Hyrcanus attacked the Samaritans and destroyed the temple on Mount Gerizim (about 128 <span>BC<\/span>). In this context of mutual animosity, no first-century Jew would expect a despised Samaritan to help a wounded Jew. But in God’s Kingdom, a despised foreigner becomes a helping neighbor!<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:33 a despised Samaritan: This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used th...","summary_en":"10:33 a despised Samaritan: This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used th...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111149,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:33","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:33<\/strong> <em>a despised Samaritan:<\/em> This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used their own version of the Pentateuch (Genesis—Deuteronomy) as their Scripture. Hatred between the two increased dramatically when the Jewish king John Hyrcanus attacked the Samaritans and destroyed the temple on Mount Gerizim (about 128 <span>BC<\/span>). In this context of mutual animosity, no first-century Jew would expect a despised Samaritan to help a wounded Jew. But in God’s Kingdom, a despised foreigner becomes a helping neighbor!<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:33<\/strong> <em>a despised Samaritan:<\/em> This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used their own version of the Pentateuch (Genesis—Deuteronomy) as their Scripture. Hatred between the two increased dramatically when the Jewish king John Hyrcanus attacked the Samaritans and destroyed the temple on Mount Gerizim (about 128 <span>BC<\/span>). In this context of mutual animosity, no first-century Jew would expect a despised Samaritan to help a wounded Jew. But in God’s Kingdom, a despised foreigner becomes a helping neighbor!<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:33 a despised Samaritan: This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used th...","summary_en":"10:33 a despised Samaritan: This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used th...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138775,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:33","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:33<\/strong> <em>a despised Samaritan:<\/em> This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used their own version of the Pentateuch (Genesis—Deuteronomy) as their Scripture. Hatred between the two increased dramatically when the Jewish king John Hyrcanus attacked the Samaritans and destroyed the temple on Mount Gerizim (about 128 <span>BC<\/span>). In this context of mutual animosity, no first-century Jew would expect a despised Samaritan to help a wounded Jew. But in God’s Kingdom, a despised foreigner becomes a helping neighbor!<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:33<\/strong> <em>a despised Samaritan:<\/em> This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used their own version of the Pentateuch (Genesis—Deuteronomy) as their Scripture. Hatred between the two increased dramatically when the Jewish king John Hyrcanus attacked the Samaritans and destroyed the temple on Mount Gerizim (about 128 <span>BC<\/span>). In this context of mutual animosity, no first-century Jew would expect a despised Samaritan to help a wounded Jew. But in God’s Kingdom, a despised foreigner becomes a helping neighbor!<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:33 a despised Samaritan: This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used th...","summary_en":"10:33 a despised Samaritan: This reversal in the story must have left the listeners aghast. Jews and Samaritans hated each other (see 9:52-53; 17:16; John 4:4-42). After the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, Assyrian colonists intermarried with Israelites left in Samaria; these inhabitants became known as Samaritans. After the Judeans returned from Babylon, conflict arose between the Jews and the Samaritans (Ezra 4:1-24), who built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and used th...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65023,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92649,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120275,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147901,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":17559,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Inn","title_en":"Inn","content_ro":"<h3>INN<\/h3>\n<p>Place of lodging for travelers.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, the word “inn” occurs three times (<span>kjv<\/span>): twice in reference to overnight rests of Joseph’s brothers during their journeys between Egypt and Canaan (Gn 42:27; 43:21), and once in a similar situation when Moses was returning to Egypt from Midian to lead the children of Israel (Ex 4:24). The <span>rsv<\/span> translates each of these instances as “lodging place” because in the time of the patriarchs and Moses the Near East had nothing to correspond to the inn as a public place with accommodations for hire to travelers. In a settled country a traveler could ordinarily expect hospitality from the inhabitants. Throughout the Near East, hospitality was viewed as a serious social responsibility (see Gn 19:1-3; Jgs 19:15-21). In deserted areas travelers would provide for their own shelter (e.g., Gn 28:11) and sustenance (e.g., Jos 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The beginning of real inns in Palestine is obscure. It has been argued that they had a foreign origin, since the rabbinic words for “inn” are borrowed from Greek and Latin. References to Rahab (Jos 2:1) as innkeeper in the Targum and in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 5.1.12) may be anachronistic, and they provide no reliable witness to the existence of inns during the time of Joshua, though there are parallels in the Near East of women keeping an establishment providing both lodging and sexual activity for travelers. Certainly there is evidence for Greek inns as early as the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, and they became common in the Hellenized Mediterranean. They were typically uncomfortable and dangerous.<\/p>\n<p>Such an “inn” with an “innkeeper” sheltered the victim of robbers whom the Good Samaritan befriended (Lk 10:34-35). This inn was probably much like the khan or caravansary, which has been common along the trade and pilgrimage routes of Syria since ancient times. It was built in the form of a square enclosing an open court where water and shelter were available, but the traveler typically supplied his own food and sometimes his own bedding. The Good Samaritan clearly expected the host to provide full care for the wounded man; it is difficult to tell whether this was customary or simply an accommodation to the emergency. The inn of Jesus’ story has long been identified with the Khan Hathrur, halfway between Jerusalem and Jericho, though the present structure is probably only one of many built in the same place.<\/p>\n<p>Two other well-known passages in the NT allude, not to a real inn, but to other social customs and arrangements. First, Christians from the church at Rome met the prisoner Paul at Three Taverns, a stopping place 33 miles (53 kilometers) from Rome at the intersection of the Appian Way with the road from Antium (Acts 28:15). Second, there is the “inn” from which Joseph and Mary were excluded (Lk 2:7). The word is elsewhere translated “guestchamber” (<span>kjv<\/span>) and “guest room” (Mk 14:14; Lk 22:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Jews of Jerusalem took pride in having enough such guest rooms to accommodate the huge influx of pilgrims keeping Passover in the city (cf. Acts 2:6-11 on the crowd at Pentecost); evidently Joseph and Mary expected such accommodation in Bethlehem for the census, but found their place already taken.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INN<\/h3>\n<p>Place of lodging for travelers.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, the word “inn” occurs three times (<span>kjv<\/span>): twice in reference to overnight rests of Joseph’s brothers during their journeys between Egypt and Canaan (Gn 42:27; 43:21), and once in a similar situation when Moses was returning to Egypt from Midian to lead the children of Israel (Ex 4:24). The <span>rsv<\/span> translates each of these instances as “lodging place” because in the time of the patriarchs and Moses the Near East had nothing to correspond to the inn as a public place with accommodations for hire to travelers. In a settled country a traveler could ordinarily expect hospitality from the inhabitants. Throughout the Near East, hospitality was viewed as a serious social responsibility (see Gn 19:1-3; Jgs 19:15-21). In deserted areas travelers would provide for their own shelter (e.g., Gn 28:11) and sustenance (e.g., Jos 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The beginning of real inns in Palestine is obscure. It has been argued that they had a foreign origin, since the rabbinic words for “inn” are borrowed from Greek and Latin. References to Rahab (Jos 2:1) as innkeeper in the Targum and in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 5.1.12) may be anachronistic, and they provide no reliable witness to the existence of inns during the time of Joshua, though there are parallels in the Near East of women keeping an establishment providing both lodging and sexual activity for travelers. Certainly there is evidence for Greek inns as early as the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, and they became common in the Hellenized Mediterranean. They were typically uncomfortable and dangerous.<\/p>\n<p>Such an “inn” with an “innkeeper” sheltered the victim of robbers whom the Good Samaritan befriended (Lk 10:34-35). This inn was probably much like the khan or caravansary, which has been common along the trade and pilgrimage routes of Syria since ancient times. It was built in the form of a square enclosing an open court where water and shelter were available, but the traveler typically supplied his own food and sometimes his own bedding. The Good Samaritan clearly expected the host to provide full care for the wounded man; it is difficult to tell whether this was customary or simply an accommodation to the emergency. The inn of Jesus’ story has long been identified with the Khan Hathrur, halfway between Jerusalem and Jericho, though the present structure is probably only one of many built in the same place.<\/p>\n<p>Two other well-known passages in the NT allude, not to a real inn, but to other social customs and arrangements. First, Christians from the church at Rome met the prisoner Paul at Three Taverns, a stopping place 33 miles (53 kilometers) from Rome at the intersection of the Appian Way with the road from Antium (Acts 28:15). Second, there is the “inn” from which Joseph and Mary were excluded (Lk 2:7). The word is elsewhere translated “guestchamber” (<span>kjv<\/span>) and “guest room” (Mk 14:14; Lk 22:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Jews of Jerusalem took pride in having enough such guest rooms to accommodate the huge influx of pilgrims keeping Passover in the city (cf. Acts 2:6-11 on the crowd at Pentecost); evidently Joseph and Mary expected such accommodation in Bethlehem for the census, but found their place already taken.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INN Place of lodging for travelers. In the OT, the word “inn” occurs three times (kjv): twice in reference to overnight rests of Joseph’s brothers during their journeys between Egypt and Canaan (Gn 42:27; 43:21), and once in a similar situation when Moses was returning to Egypt from Midian to lead the children of Israel (Ex 4:24). The rsv translates each of these instances as “lodging place” because in the time of the patriarchs and Moses the Near East had nothing to correspond to the inn as ...","summary_en":"INN Place of lodging for travelers. In the OT, the word “inn” occurs three times (kjv): twice in reference to overnight rests of Joseph’s brothers during their journeys between Egypt and Canaan (Gn 42:27; 43:21), and once in a similar situation when Moses was returning to Egypt from Midian to lead the children of Israel (Ex 4:24). The rsv translates each of these instances as “lodging place” because in the time of the patriarchs and Moses the Near East had nothing to correspond to the inn as ...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24979,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Medicine and Medical Practice","title_en":"Medicine and Medical Practice","content_ro":"<h3>MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE<\/h3>\n<p>The field of knowledge dealing with the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of diseases, as well as the actual substances used to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease.<\/p>\n<p>Medicine as a branch of knowledge received little attention from the Hebrew people of OT times, in contrast to the surrounding cultures found in Mesopotamia and Egypt, where medical knowledge had a prominent place. Extant in the library of Assyrian king Ashurbanipal are 800 tablets relating to medicine. From these writings it can be seen that medicine at that time was a mixture of religion, divination, and demonology. Their pharmacopeia was extensive and included agents such as dog dung and human urine. Surgical operations were performed by some physicians. An unusual method of diagnosis practiced in Babylon was to inspect the liver of a freshly killed animal and compare it with a clay model of a liver from a normal animal. Differences between the two were used to diagnose the condition of the patient. An interesting example of this, and divination, is found in Ezekiel 21:21.<\/p>\n<p>The art of medicine was more advanced in Egypt than in Mesopotamia, depending more upon logic and observation. The Edwin-Smith papyrus is the oldest surgical treatise known. It discusses a variety of fractures, dislocations, wounds, tumors, and ulcers. Adhesive plaster, surgical stitching, and cauterization were used in treatment. The heart was recognized as the center of the circulatory system, and the pulse was observed. The Ebers papyrus deals with problems of internal medicine and their treatment. Enemas were a popular form of therapy, and their <em>materia medica<\/em> contained an assortment of remedies ranging from castor oil to animal fat to hot sand. Other papyri deal with gynecological problems and contain formularies and many magical incantations. Mummification was a highly developed art; Joseph had his father Jacob embalmed (Gn 50:2).<\/p>\n<p>The outlook of the Hebrew people in OT times toward disease was entirely different from that of their heathen neighbors. They did not believe in the heathen superstitions or gods and, consequently, did not develop a medical knowledge similar to the Egyptians and Babylonians. Instead, the Hebrews regarded sickness as a judgment from God (Ex 15:26; Dt 28:22, 35, 60-61; Jn 9:2) and recovery also was attributed to God (Ex 15:26; Ps 103:3). In accordance with this philosophy, King Asa’s reliance on physicians instead of on God is referred to in a reproachful way in 2 Chronicles 16:12. Therefore, while medical treatment was available in Israel, its use and development was less advanced than in neighboring lands.<\/p>\n<p>The most significant contribution the Hebrews gave to medicine was in the hygienic measures outlined in the Law, particularly Leviticus 11–15. While these had primarily a religious significance, they undoubtedly improved the general level of health and physical well-being of the people. The Hebrew priest was not the counterpart of the physician-priest found in other cultures. Although the Hebrew priest was expected to determine what physical conditions rendered a person ceremonially unclean, there is no intimation in Scripture that he treated diseases.<\/p>\n<p>The only surgical operation mentioned in Scripture is circumcision. This was performed by the Hebrews for religious rather than medical purposes, and it was not done by a physician but by the head of the house or someone else (Ex 4:25). In Ezekiel 30:21 reference is made to treating a fracture of the arm by immobilizing and splinting it with a roller bandage.<\/p>\n<p>Obstetrical care was given by women who were experienced midwives (Gn 35:17). In Genesis 38:27-30 there is an account of the birth of twins complicated by a transverse presentation. This is a difficult problem for even the most skilled obstetrician, and the fact that the mother and both babies survived speaks highly for the skill of this midwife. In Exodus 1:15-21 the use of birth stools for delivery is mentioned. This was a device to hold the laboring woman in a position favorable for delivering the baby.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, Greek medicine had a dominant influence in the Mediterranean world. Although the practice of medicine was still in a primitive state, Hippocrates and other Greek physicians of his day laid the basis for modern medicine by rejecting magical explanations of diseases and through careful observation attempted to give a rational basis for medical treatment. From Mark 5:26 it is known that physicians were available in Israel. Indeed, the rabbis ordained that every town must have at least one physician, and some rabbis themselves practiced medicine.<\/p>\n<p>Specific medical remedies are occasionally mentioned in the Bible. Mandrakes were used as an aphrodisiac (Gn 30:14; Sg 7:13). When Job was afflicted with generalized boils, he removed the devitalized skin with a piece of pottery and sat in ashes (Jb 2:7-8). The ashes would have a drying effect on the draining sores, giving this treatment a rational basis for its use. Jeremiah refers in a rhetorical way to the balm in Gilead, indicating its medicinal use (Jer 8:22; 46:11). The exact nature or use of this balm is not known. When Hezekiah was mortally ill, he was instructed by Isaiah to put a lump of figs on the boil (2 Kgs 20:7). This probably should not be considered a treatment, however, any more than the dipping seven times in the Jordan by Naaman or the application of mud to the eyes of the blind by the Lord. The therapeutic effect of merriment on the mind found in Proverbs 17:22 is in accord with modern mental health beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>Medicinal use of wine is recorded several times in Scripture. Its mood-changing ability is alluded to in Proverbs 31:6, and apparently the sour wine offered to the Lord on the cross was intended to ameliorate his suffering through its analgesic property (Jn 19:29). Paul suggests to Timothy that he use a little wine for his stomach and other infirmities (1 Tm 5:23). It is significant that Paul said “a little” because pharmacologists today agree that wine in moderate amounts aids digestion and helps blood circulation; however, excessive amounts are deleterious to the health in numerous ways. The good Samaritan used oil and wine to treat the wounds of the injured man (Lk 10:34). Because of its alcoholic content, the wine would have an antiseptic action, but at the same time it would tend to coagulate the surface of the raw wound and permit bacteria to thrive under the coagulum. The oil, by its emollient effect, would tend to nullify this latter undesirable side effect of wine and would also be soothing due to its coating action. A dressing was then applied, and the patient was taken to a resting place.<\/p>\n<p>In Revelation 3:18 the Laodicean church is admonished to use eye salve. Since Laodicea was famous for a powder used for weak and ailing eyes, this illustration is uniquely appropriate to use in warning this church concerning its lack of spiritual vision.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Disease; Physician; Plague.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE<\/h3>\n<p>The field of knowledge dealing with the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of diseases, as well as the actual substances used to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease.<\/p>\n<p>Medicine as a branch of knowledge received little attention from the Hebrew people of OT times, in contrast to the surrounding cultures found in Mesopotamia and Egypt, where medical knowledge had a prominent place. Extant in the library of Assyrian king Ashurbanipal are 800 tablets relating to medicine. From these writings it can be seen that medicine at that time was a mixture of religion, divination, and demonology. Their pharmacopeia was extensive and included agents such as dog dung and human urine. Surgical operations were performed by some physicians. An unusual method of diagnosis practiced in Babylon was to inspect the liver of a freshly killed animal and compare it with a clay model of a liver from a normal animal. Differences between the two were used to diagnose the condition of the patient. An interesting example of this, and divination, is found in Ezekiel 21:21.<\/p>\n<p>The art of medicine was more advanced in Egypt than in Mesopotamia, depending more upon logic and observation. The Edwin-Smith papyrus is the oldest surgical treatise known. It discusses a variety of fractures, dislocations, wounds, tumors, and ulcers. Adhesive plaster, surgical stitching, and cauterization were used in treatment. The heart was recognized as the center of the circulatory system, and the pulse was observed. The Ebers papyrus deals with problems of internal medicine and their treatment. Enemas were a popular form of therapy, and their <em>materia medica<\/em> contained an assortment of remedies ranging from castor oil to animal fat to hot sand. Other papyri deal with gynecological problems and contain formularies and many magical incantations. Mummification was a highly developed art; Joseph had his father Jacob embalmed (Gn 50:2).<\/p>\n<p>The outlook of the Hebrew people in OT times toward disease was entirely different from that of their heathen neighbors. They did not believe in the heathen superstitions or gods and, consequently, did not develop a medical knowledge similar to the Egyptians and Babylonians. Instead, the Hebrews regarded sickness as a judgment from God (Ex 15:26; Dt 28:22, 35, 60-61; Jn 9:2) and recovery also was attributed to God (Ex 15:26; Ps 103:3). In accordance with this philosophy, King Asa’s reliance on physicians instead of on God is referred to in a reproachful way in 2 Chronicles 16:12. Therefore, while medical treatment was available in Israel, its use and development was less advanced than in neighboring lands.<\/p>\n<p>The most significant contribution the Hebrews gave to medicine was in the hygienic measures outlined in the Law, particularly Leviticus 11–15. While these had primarily a religious significance, they undoubtedly improved the general level of health and physical well-being of the people. The Hebrew priest was not the counterpart of the physician-priest found in other cultures. Although the Hebrew priest was expected to determine what physical conditions rendered a person ceremonially unclean, there is no intimation in Scripture that he treated diseases.<\/p>\n<p>The only surgical operation mentioned in Scripture is circumcision. This was performed by the Hebrews for religious rather than medical purposes, and it was not done by a physician but by the head of the house or someone else (Ex 4:25). In Ezekiel 30:21 reference is made to treating a fracture of the arm by immobilizing and splinting it with a roller bandage.<\/p>\n<p>Obstetrical care was given by women who were experienced midwives (Gn 35:17). In Genesis 38:27-30 there is an account of the birth of twins complicated by a transverse presentation. This is a difficult problem for even the most skilled obstetrician, and the fact that the mother and both babies survived speaks highly for the skill of this midwife. In Exodus 1:15-21 the use of birth stools for delivery is mentioned. This was a device to hold the laboring woman in a position favorable for delivering the baby.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, Greek medicine had a dominant influence in the Mediterranean world. Although the practice of medicine was still in a primitive state, Hippocrates and other Greek physicians of his day laid the basis for modern medicine by rejecting magical explanations of diseases and through careful observation attempted to give a rational basis for medical treatment. From Mark 5:26 it is known that physicians were available in Israel. Indeed, the rabbis ordained that every town must have at least one physician, and some rabbis themselves practiced medicine.<\/p>\n<p>Specific medical remedies are occasionally mentioned in the Bible. Mandrakes were used as an aphrodisiac (Gn 30:14; Sg 7:13). When Job was afflicted with generalized boils, he removed the devitalized skin with a piece of pottery and sat in ashes (Jb 2:7-8). The ashes would have a drying effect on the draining sores, giving this treatment a rational basis for its use. Jeremiah refers in a rhetorical way to the balm in Gilead, indicating its medicinal use (Jer 8:22; 46:11). The exact nature or use of this balm is not known. When Hezekiah was mortally ill, he was instructed by Isaiah to put a lump of figs on the boil (2 Kgs 20:7). This probably should not be considered a treatment, however, any more than the dipping seven times in the Jordan by Naaman or the application of mud to the eyes of the blind by the Lord. The therapeutic effect of merriment on the mind found in Proverbs 17:22 is in accord with modern mental health beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>Medicinal use of wine is recorded several times in Scripture. Its mood-changing ability is alluded to in Proverbs 31:6, and apparently the sour wine offered to the Lord on the cross was intended to ameliorate his suffering through its analgesic property (Jn 19:29). Paul suggests to Timothy that he use a little wine for his stomach and other infirmities (1 Tm 5:23). It is significant that Paul said “a little” because pharmacologists today agree that wine in moderate amounts aids digestion and helps blood circulation; however, excessive amounts are deleterious to the health in numerous ways. The good Samaritan used oil and wine to treat the wounds of the injured man (Lk 10:34). Because of its alcoholic content, the wine would have an antiseptic action, but at the same time it would tend to coagulate the surface of the raw wound and permit bacteria to thrive under the coagulum. The oil, by its emollient effect, would tend to nullify this latter undesirable side effect of wine and would also be soothing due to its coating action. A dressing was then applied, and the patient was taken to a resting place.<\/p>\n<p>In Revelation 3:18 the Laodicean church is admonished to use eye salve. Since Laodicea was famous for a powder used for weak and ailing eyes, this illustration is uniquely appropriate to use in warning this church concerning its lack of spiritual vision.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Disease; Physician; Plague.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE The field of knowledge dealing with the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of diseases, as well as the actual substances used to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease. Medicine as a branch of knowledge received little attention from the Hebrew people of OT times, in contrast to the surrounding cultures found in Mesopotamia and Egypt, where medical knowledge had a prominent place. Extant in the library of Assyrian king Ashurbanipal are 800 tablets relating to medi...","summary_en":"MEDICINE AND MEDICAL PRACTICE The field of knowledge dealing with the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of diseases, as well as the actual substances used to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease. Medicine as a branch of knowledge received little attention from the Hebrew people of OT times, in contrast to the surrounding cultures found in Mesopotamia and Egypt, where medical knowledge had a prominent place. Extant in the library of Assyrian king Ashurbanipal are 800 tablets relating to medi...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27294,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Neighbor","title_en":"Neighbor","content_ro":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","summary_en":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28374,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Oil","title_en":"Oil","content_ro":"<h3>OIL<\/h3>\n<p>Substance most commonly produced from the olive berry, although the word could also apply to oil of myrrh (Est 2:12). Oil was used primarily in cooking, but additionally as a cosmetic for anointing the body, for medicinal purposes, as a source of light, for anointing kings and priests, and in religious offerings.<\/p>\n<p>The growth of olive trees was widespread, and the Israelites took advantage of this major crop to establish a thriving trade in oil with Tyre and Egypt. Like precious metals and animals, oil became an established medium of exchange. Solomon used it as part of the payment to Hiram for construction expenses connected with the temple (1 Kgs 5:11; Ez 27:17).<\/p>\n<p>Because oil was essential for everyday life, it was an effective and acceptable medium of barter. Oil was used in the preparation of most food (1 Kgs 17:12-16). The common cake or patty of grain, which formed the basis of the noon meal, would be cooked on a griddle with a little oil.<\/p>\n<p>As a cosmetic, oil was used for anointing the body after a bath (Ru 3:3; 2 Sm 12:20). It was frequently used on festive occasions, and at Egyptian banquets the heads of both the guests and the female entertainers were anointed. In the NT, the anointing of the sick is mentioned (Jas 5:14). Olive oil could also be taken internally as a medicine for the relief of gastric disorders. It had a soothing effect and was also used as a mild laxative. It was applied externally as an ointment for bruises, burns, cuts, and abrasions (Is 1:6; Mk 6:13; Lk 10:34).<\/p>\n<p>As soon as the sun set, the only source of light was the oil lamp. Often the small portable one could be placed easily on a shelf, but in large homes, palaces, synagogues, or temples, the lamp could rest on a tall metal base like a standard lamp. The wick of flax (Is 42:3) or hemp was placed in the oil that gave out a flame until it was extinguished or the supply of fuel ran out. Torches were used in the streets both to light the way and for additional security. They added immeasurably to the festive atmosphere of evening processions. Torches were an essential part of the wedding procession, and normally those carrying the torches brought a quantity of oil in a container in case there was a delay and their supply was exhausted. This scene is vividly portrayed in Jesus’ parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-13).<\/p>\n<p>In other ceremonial events, oil had a special meaning when used for the anointing of kings (1 Sm 10:1; 1 Kgs 1:39) and priests (Ex 29:7). It was symbolic of the office and of the recognition of God’s blessing on the officeholder.<\/p>\n<p>Quantities of oil were used in the temple. It was donated as part of the firstfruit offering (Ex 22:29) and was also subject to tithing (Dt 12:17). Oil was frequently used for the ceremonial aspect of temple life or as part of the offering. The grain offering was mixed with oil (Lv 8:26; Nm 7:19), and the oil in the lamp that burned in the sanctuary constantly needed replenishing (Lv 24:2). The daily sacrifice required the use of oil (Ex 29:40), although the sin offering (Lv 5:11) and the jealousy offering (Nm 5:15) specifically did not use oil.<\/p>\n<p>A pestle and mortar, or a stone press, pressed oil from the olives (Ex 27:20). Where the latter was used, the pulp initially produced by the press was often trodden out or subjected to further extensive pressing. Stone presses were set up to process the quantities of berries available at the Mt of Olives. The word for “oil press” was <em>gatt-semen,<\/em> hence the name Gethsemane.<\/p>\n<p>Oil was symbolically associated with joy, festivity, ceremony, honor, light, and health (both spiritual and physical), while its absence spelled sorrow (Jl 1:10) and the withdrawal of all that is good in life.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Anoint; Food and Food Preparation; Medicine and Medical Practice; Ointment; Plants (Olive, Olive Tree).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OIL<\/h3>\n<p>Substance most commonly produced from the olive berry, although the word could also apply to oil of myrrh (Est 2:12). Oil was used primarily in cooking, but additionally as a cosmetic for anointing the body, for medicinal purposes, as a source of light, for anointing kings and priests, and in religious offerings.<\/p>\n<p>The growth of olive trees was widespread, and the Israelites took advantage of this major crop to establish a thriving trade in oil with Tyre and Egypt. Like precious metals and animals, oil became an established medium of exchange. Solomon used it as part of the payment to Hiram for construction expenses connected with the temple (1 Kgs 5:11; Ez 27:17).<\/p>\n<p>Because oil was essential for everyday life, it was an effective and acceptable medium of barter. Oil was used in the preparation of most food (1 Kgs 17:12-16). The common cake or patty of grain, which formed the basis of the noon meal, would be cooked on a griddle with a little oil.<\/p>\n<p>As a cosmetic, oil was used for anointing the body after a bath (Ru 3:3; 2 Sm 12:20). It was frequently used on festive occasions, and at Egyptian banquets the heads of both the guests and the female entertainers were anointed. In the NT, the anointing of the sick is mentioned (Jas 5:14). Olive oil could also be taken internally as a medicine for the relief of gastric disorders. It had a soothing effect and was also used as a mild laxative. It was applied externally as an ointment for bruises, burns, cuts, and abrasions (Is 1:6; Mk 6:13; Lk 10:34).<\/p>\n<p>As soon as the sun set, the only source of light was the oil lamp. Often the small portable one could be placed easily on a shelf, but in large homes, palaces, synagogues, or temples, the lamp could rest on a tall metal base like a standard lamp. The wick of flax (Is 42:3) or hemp was placed in the oil that gave out a flame until it was extinguished or the supply of fuel ran out. Torches were used in the streets both to light the way and for additional security. They added immeasurably to the festive atmosphere of evening processions. Torches were an essential part of the wedding procession, and normally those carrying the torches brought a quantity of oil in a container in case there was a delay and their supply was exhausted. This scene is vividly portrayed in Jesus’ parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-13).<\/p>\n<p>In other ceremonial events, oil had a special meaning when used for the anointing of kings (1 Sm 10:1; 1 Kgs 1:39) and priests (Ex 29:7). It was symbolic of the office and of the recognition of God’s blessing on the officeholder.<\/p>\n<p>Quantities of oil were used in the temple. It was donated as part of the firstfruit offering (Ex 22:29) and was also subject to tithing (Dt 12:17). Oil was frequently used for the ceremonial aspect of temple life or as part of the offering. The grain offering was mixed with oil (Lv 8:26; Nm 7:19), and the oil in the lamp that burned in the sanctuary constantly needed replenishing (Lv 24:2). The daily sacrifice required the use of oil (Ex 29:40), although the sin offering (Lv 5:11) and the jealousy offering (Nm 5:15) specifically did not use oil.<\/p>\n<p>A pestle and mortar, or a stone press, pressed oil from the olives (Ex 27:20). Where the latter was used, the pulp initially produced by the press was often trodden out or subjected to further extensive pressing. Stone presses were set up to process the quantities of berries available at the Mt of Olives. The word for “oil press” was <em>gatt-semen,<\/em> hence the name Gethsemane.<\/p>\n<p>Oil was symbolically associated with joy, festivity, ceremony, honor, light, and health (both spiritual and physical), while its absence spelled sorrow (Jl 1:10) and the withdrawal of all that is good in life.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Anoint; Food and Food Preparation; Medicine and Medical Practice; Ointment; Plants (Olive, Olive Tree).<\/p>","summary_ro":"OIL Substance most commonly produced from the olive berry, although the word could also apply to oil of myrrh (Est 2:12). Oil was used primarily in cooking, but additionally as a cosmetic for anointing the body, for medicinal purposes, as a source of light, for anointing kings and priests, and in religious offerings. The growth of olive trees was widespread, and the Israelites took advantage of this major crop to establish a thriving trade in oil with Tyre and Egypt. Like precious metals and ...","summary_en":"OIL Substance most commonly produced from the olive berry, although the word could also apply to oil of myrrh (Est 2:12). Oil was used primarily in cooking, but additionally as a cosmetic for anointing the body, for medicinal purposes, as a source of light, for anointing kings and priests, and in religious offerings. The growth of olive trees was widespread, and the Israelites took advantage of this major crop to establish a thriving trade in oil with Tyre and Egypt. Like precious metals and ...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28409,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ointment","title_en":"Ointment","content_ro":"<h3>OINTMENT<\/h3>\n<p>Various preparations, generally of a spicy nature with an oil base. In Palestine, olive oil was the chief base of ointments and was itself considered an ointment. The OT does not distinguish between “oil” and “ointment.” In Egypt and Mesopotamia, numerous vegetable oils and animal fats formed the basis of ointments. Among the vegetable oils, some of the more important include castor oil, sesame oil, linseed oil, radish oil, colocynth oil, and oil from various nuts.<\/p>\n<p>Ointments played an important and visible role in antiquity. In the hot and dry climate of the Near East, ointments gave a measure of protection. Widespread medicinal uses, soothing qualities, and effectiveness in masking odors made the use of ointments a virtual necessity among all classes. The OT mentions apothecaries or perfumers (1 Sm 8:13; 2 Chr 16:14), artisans who were organized into guilds (Neh 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>In general, ointments were made by boiling aromatic substances in oil (cf. Jb 41:31). Perfumed ointments were combinations of certain raw materials with specially prepared oil. In the OT, qualifying terms such as “fragrant” (Sg 1:3) or “precious” (Eccl 7:1) signify perfumed oils. Ointments could be stored in a variety of vessels, but flasks made of alabaster were preferred. An alabaster jar held the expensive ointment with which Mary anointed Jesus in Bethany (Mk 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Ointments had a variety of uses. Among the Semites in particular, ointments acquired important associations. Aaron, his sons, the tabernacle, and its furnishings were all consecrated by holy anointing oil. This compound consisted of myrrh, cinnamon, calamus, and cassia mixed with olive oil (Ex 30:23-25). Kings and prophets were anointed, but not with the holy anointing oil mixture.<\/p>\n<p>As a cosmetic, perfumed ointments controlled unpleasant odors. Applications were made to the body (2 Sm 12:20), clothing (Ps 45:8), or personal objects (Prv 7:17). Women utilized ointments for cleansing the skin and enhancing the attractiveness of their skin (Est 2:12). The fragrance of certain ointments attracted the attention of the opposite sex (Sg 4:10). Not surprisingly, the Song of Songs has several references to fragrant ointments.<\/p>\n<p>The use of ointments to refresh and soothe guests was a mark of hospitality in the ancient Near East. Cones of ointment placed on the heads of guests and allowed to drip down over the body were used by the Egyptians (cf. Ps 133:2). As a sign of respect and honor, the head of a guest was anointed with oil. Jesus chided a Pharisee who neglected this traditional mark of hospitality (Lk 7:37-40). Mary anointed Jesus with a costly flask of nard, a fragrant ointment obtained from the roots of an aromatic herb from India (Mk 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Ointments were used in the burial process. In the NT a corpse would be washed (Acts 9:37) and anointed with ointments (Mk 16:1). The body was wrapped in linen garments with spices and ointments (Lk 23:56; Jn 19:40). Both the Jews and the Romans utilized nard for burials. A mixture of myrrh and aloes was used in the burial of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Medicinal uses of ointment were frequent. Oil was applied to wounds (Lk 10:34). Balm (probably an aromatic gum) had well-known medicinal uses and is associated with Gilead (Jer 8:22). Balm was an item of export from Palestine (Gn 37:25; Ez 27:17). Biblical reference is made to a famous eye ointment produced and exported by the city of Laodicea (Rv 3:18). Ointments formed an important commodity for merchants in the Roman period (18:13).<\/p>\n<p>Anointing with oil came to be associated with gladness and joy (Ps 45:7; Is 61:3). Thus, one was to refrain from anointing during times of mourning (2 Sm 14:2). The lack of oil for anointing was viewed as judgment (Mi 6:15). Shields were anointed with oil to make them supple and possibly to help deflect projectiles (2 Sm 1:21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Oil; Plants (Olive, Olive Tree).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OINTMENT<\/h3>\n<p>Various preparations, generally of a spicy nature with an oil base. In Palestine, olive oil was the chief base of ointments and was itself considered an ointment. The OT does not distinguish between “oil” and “ointment.” In Egypt and Mesopotamia, numerous vegetable oils and animal fats formed the basis of ointments. Among the vegetable oils, some of the more important include castor oil, sesame oil, linseed oil, radish oil, colocynth oil, and oil from various nuts.<\/p>\n<p>Ointments played an important and visible role in antiquity. In the hot and dry climate of the Near East, ointments gave a measure of protection. Widespread medicinal uses, soothing qualities, and effectiveness in masking odors made the use of ointments a virtual necessity among all classes. The OT mentions apothecaries or perfumers (1 Sm 8:13; 2 Chr 16:14), artisans who were organized into guilds (Neh 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>In general, ointments were made by boiling aromatic substances in oil (cf. Jb 41:31). Perfumed ointments were combinations of certain raw materials with specially prepared oil. In the OT, qualifying terms such as “fragrant” (Sg 1:3) or “precious” (Eccl 7:1) signify perfumed oils. Ointments could be stored in a variety of vessels, but flasks made of alabaster were preferred. An alabaster jar held the expensive ointment with which Mary anointed Jesus in Bethany (Mk 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Ointments had a variety of uses. Among the Semites in particular, ointments acquired important associations. Aaron, his sons, the tabernacle, and its furnishings were all consecrated by holy anointing oil. This compound consisted of myrrh, cinnamon, calamus, and cassia mixed with olive oil (Ex 30:23-25). Kings and prophets were anointed, but not with the holy anointing oil mixture.<\/p>\n<p>As a cosmetic, perfumed ointments controlled unpleasant odors. Applications were made to the body (2 Sm 12:20), clothing (Ps 45:8), or personal objects (Prv 7:17). Women utilized ointments for cleansing the skin and enhancing the attractiveness of their skin (Est 2:12). The fragrance of certain ointments attracted the attention of the opposite sex (Sg 4:10). Not surprisingly, the Song of Songs has several references to fragrant ointments.<\/p>\n<p>The use of ointments to refresh and soothe guests was a mark of hospitality in the ancient Near East. Cones of ointment placed on the heads of guests and allowed to drip down over the body were used by the Egyptians (cf. Ps 133:2). As a sign of respect and honor, the head of a guest was anointed with oil. Jesus chided a Pharisee who neglected this traditional mark of hospitality (Lk 7:37-40). Mary anointed Jesus with a costly flask of nard, a fragrant ointment obtained from the roots of an aromatic herb from India (Mk 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Ointments were used in the burial process. In the NT a corpse would be washed (Acts 9:37) and anointed with ointments (Mk 16:1). The body was wrapped in linen garments with spices and ointments (Lk 23:56; Jn 19:40). Both the Jews and the Romans utilized nard for burials. A mixture of myrrh and aloes was used in the burial of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Medicinal uses of ointment were frequent. Oil was applied to wounds (Lk 10:34). Balm (probably an aromatic gum) had well-known medicinal uses and is associated with Gilead (Jer 8:22). Balm was an item of export from Palestine (Gn 37:25; Ez 27:17). Biblical reference is made to a famous eye ointment produced and exported by the city of Laodicea (Rv 3:18). Ointments formed an important commodity for merchants in the Roman period (18:13).<\/p>\n<p>Anointing with oil came to be associated with gladness and joy (Ps 45:7; Is 61:3). Thus, one was to refrain from anointing during times of mourning (2 Sm 14:2). The lack of oil for anointing was viewed as judgment (Mi 6:15). Shields were anointed with oil to make them supple and possibly to help deflect projectiles (2 Sm 1:21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Oil; Plants (Olive, Olive Tree).<\/p>","summary_ro":"OINTMENT Various preparations, generally of a spicy nature with an oil base. In Palestine, olive oil was the chief base of ointments and was itself considered an ointment. The OT does not distinguish between “oil” and “ointment.” In Egypt and Mesopotamia, numerous vegetable oils and animal fats formed the basis of ointments. Among the vegetable oils, some of the more important include castor oil, sesame oil, linseed oil, radish oil, colocynth oil, and oil from various nuts. Ointments played a...","summary_en":"OINTMENT Various preparations, generally of a spicy nature with an oil base. In Palestine, olive oil was the chief base of ointments and was itself considered an ointment. The OT does not distinguish between “oil” and “ointment.” In Egypt and Mesopotamia, numerous vegetable oils and animal fats formed the basis of ointments. Among the vegetable oils, some of the more important include castor oil, sesame oil, linseed oil, radish oil, colocynth oil, and oil from various nuts. Ointments played a...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55898,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:34","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:34<\/strong> <em>Oil<\/em> soothed the wound; <em>wine<\/em> was a disinfectant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:34<\/strong> <em>Oil<\/em> soothed the wound; <em>wine<\/em> was a disinfectant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:34 Oil soothed the wound; wine was a disinfectant.","summary_en":"10:34 Oil soothed the wound; wine was a disinfectant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83524,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:34","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:34<\/strong> <em>Oil<\/em> soothed the wound; <em>wine<\/em> was a disinfectant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:34<\/strong> <em>Oil<\/em> soothed the wound; <em>wine<\/em> was a disinfectant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:34 Oil soothed the wound; wine was a disinfectant.","summary_en":"10:34 Oil soothed the wound; wine was a disinfectant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111150,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:34","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:34<\/strong> <em>Oil<\/em> soothed the wound; <em>wine<\/em> was a disinfectant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:34<\/strong> <em>Oil<\/em> soothed the wound; <em>wine<\/em> was a disinfectant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:34 Oil soothed the wound; wine was a disinfectant.","summary_en":"10:34 Oil soothed the wound; wine was a disinfectant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138776,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:34","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:34<\/strong> <em>Oil<\/em> soothed the wound; <em>wine<\/em> was a disinfectant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:34<\/strong> <em>Oil<\/em> soothed the wound; <em>wine<\/em> was a disinfectant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:34 Oil soothed the wound; wine was a disinfectant.","summary_en":"10:34 Oil soothed the wound; wine was a disinfectant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"35":[{"id":7009,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Coins","title_en":"Coins","content_ro":"<h3>COINS<\/h3>\n<p>Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>• Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarliestCoinsinPalestine\">Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Not until the time of Darius the Great (Darius I of Persia, 521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) did an official government-sponsored coinage become current in Palestine. Those earliest coins were oval-shaped gold darics, along with some silver coins.<\/p>\n<p>“Dram” is another term for the Persian gold daric. It is mentioned in Ezra 2:68-69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), where Zerubbabel’s caravan offered gold darics amounting to $30,000 toward rebuilding the temple. This passage is the first mention of an actual coin in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Almost at the same time that the Persian coins became current in Palestine, the widely popular silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma pieces) of Athens began to find their way to the mercantile centers of the Phoenician, Israelite, and Philistine coasts. Archaeologists have unearthed them in hoards throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. They continued to be used through the Persian period, which lasted until the Persian Empire was conquered by Alexander the Great in 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>. The coin was thick and heavy in appearance, but being of high-quality silver, it was in great demand for international commerce. Presumably Greek merchants found they could obtain the most desirable Asiatic imports in exchange for that particular form of currency.<\/p>\n<p>The silver didrachma, or half-drachma, in general use in the Greek Empire from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, continued through Roman times. After Alexander’s conquests, of course, Greek coins were used throughout the Macedonian Empire from present-day Yugoslavia to Pakistan. They were almost certainly employed for business purposes in Judea, for example.<\/p>\n<p>The shekels of the Phoenician trade centers of Tyre and Sidon, which had contributed substantially to the money supply in the Persian period, continued to be accepted in Judea even after the Alexandrian conquest. Typical of Sidon was a silver shekel portraying the battlements and walls of Sidon’s harbor, with a ship lying at anchor and two prancing lions in the foreground. A typical Tyrian shekel showed the god Baal robed and wearing a tiara. He was riding a hippocamp (winged horse with the tail of a fish) on the sea, with a fish or dolphin beneath. The reverse showed an Egyptian-type owl facing right, plus a shepherd’s crook and flail, both royal insignia in Egypt. The stater (or tetradrachma) found by the disciple Peter in a fish’s mouth and used to pay the temple tax for himself and Jesus may have been a Tyrian coin (Mt 17:27; <span>rsv<\/span> “shekel”).<\/p>\n<p>The talent, which represented a certain weight of gold or silver, was a common medium of exchange before the development of coinage. During the Maccabean period, John Hyrcanus saved the city of Jerusalem from destruction in 133 <span>BC<\/span> by paying a ransom from a 900-year-old hoard stored in David’s sepulcher. Three thousand talents of silver were sent to the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes in return for his promise to withdraw his troops. Treasure plundered from the temple by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is recorded as amounting to 17 talents. In gold talents that sum would represent the equivalent of the purchase price of about 15 large houses in a modern Western city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CoinagefromtheMaccabeestoHerodAgrippaI\">Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>Even though a native Jewish dynasty assumed the government of the Holy Land, it was many years before any indigenous Jewish coinage was minted. Presumably the inhabitants continued to use the coinage of Tyre and Egypt and of the Seleucid Empire for their commercial transactions. It was formerly supposed that silver shekels bearing images of the chalice and pomegranate cluster dated from the reign of Simon Maccabeus (142–134 <span>BC<\/span>); more recent archaeological discoveries prove that those coins date from the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>When the time came to issue the first Jewish coins, the die makers faced several problems. No mint was available, and no local people were skilled in design or die sinking. Coins current in the Near East at that time, which showed a high degree of design and craftsmanship, each bore the portrait head of a ruler or a god. For the Jews to make such coins would have meant contravening the second commandment, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). Not until well into Roman times was a coin struck in Palestine bearing a portrait head of a Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest coinage of the Hasmonean dynasty (the regnal name of the Maccabees) was the small bronze lepton (plural, lepta) of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Simon Maccabeus. The obverse showed two cornucopias with a pomegranate between them. That image symbolized the fertility that God had granted to the land. The reverse contained an inscription within a wreath, “John the high priest and the community of the Jews.” Small bronze lepta from the reign of Alexander Janneus, son of Hyrcanus I, have been found in great numbers. They were evidently much in demand for transactions at the temple, where money changers converted the gentile currency of visiting worshipers into the more acceptable Jewish money. Undoubtedly Hasmonean lepta were the coins Jesus scattered over the pavement of the Court of the Gentiles when he overturned the tables of the money changers (Mt 21:12; Jn 2:15). The lepton, or “mite,” of bronze or copper, worth <span>1<\/span>\/<span>400<\/span> of a shekel, was mentioned by Jesus on another occasion. He praised a widow’s gift of two mites to the temple treasury with the comment that the rich “contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living” (Mk 12:44, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Herod I came to power in Judea under the patronage of Mark Antony and secured the allegiance of the pro-Hasmonean Jews by marrying Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II, in 38 <span>BC<\/span>. Herod was empowered to strike his own bronze coins. Although he had a free hand to introduce innovations, Herod’s lepta followed tradition quite faithfully. The lepta carried an anchor with letters meaning “Of King Herod.” The reverse bore the double cornucopias with a pomegranate (or poppy) between them. Herod also minted a large bronze coin with what appears to be a Macedonian helmet on the obverse and a slender tripod on the reverse, along with an inscription of Herod’s name. Other designs he employed included wheat, eagles, and wreaths. He issued no silver coinage, relying instead on the available supplies of silver coins from Tyre, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Herod Archelaus assumed control. Lepta from that period bore a hanging cluster of grapes with a Greek inscription, and on the reverse a two-plumed Macedonian helmet. Grapes were an allusion to Israel as the Lord’s vine (Is 5).<\/p>\n<p>When Herod Antipas began his rule, also in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, he had no authority in Judea or Samaria. That portion of the former Jewish kingdom was placed under the control of Roman governors, or procurators, appointed directly by the emperor himself. Most familiar of the Roman procurators of Judea was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). His bronze coinage showed some bold innovations; his designs included representations of instruments used in the Roman religion such as the augur’s wand (resembling a shepherd’s crook in shape) and a ladle used in connection with broth prepared at sacrifices. The reverse bore a wreath enclosing the regnal date of <span>AD<\/span> 30–31. The two lepta put into the temple treasury (Lk 21:2) could have been lepta issued by Pilate or his predecessor. More likely, however, they were the Hasmonean lepta of Hyrcanus or Janneus, which were free of any taint of pagan Roman influence.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44), grandson of Herod the Great, continued the family tradition of ingratiating himself with the Roman overlords. Many of Herod Agrippa’s lepta have been found, showing a conical tasseled umbrella (perhaps symbolizing his royal protection of the people of Palestine) plus a Greek inscription indicating his reign. The reverse showed a bound cluster of three wheat ears and bore the regnal year as the legend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanCoinsinNewTestamentTimes\">Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman “as” came into circulation about 348 <span>BC<\/span> as a bronze coin bearing the figure of an animal. The coin was named after the Roman one-pound weight, equivalent to 12 ounces (340 grams) in our modern system. At the time of Christ’s birth, the Roman “as” minted for use in the Asiatic provinces bore the head of the emperor Augustus, with a laurel wreath on the reverse. A smaller bronze quadrans, or quarter “as,” was also minted by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Another bronze coin found in Greek and Roman currency was the assarion, first minted in the first century <span>BC<\/span> but still in use in the Christian period. One type was stamped with a winged sphinx, with an amphora on the reverse. It is still debated whether the coin described as a “farthing” in the <span>kjv<\/span> was in fact a Greek assarion or a Roman “as” or quadrans. The coin is mentioned four times in the NT, most familiarly in the question “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?” (see Mt 5:26; 10:29; Mk 12:42; Lk 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> “penny”). There is no doubt that the <span>kjv<\/span> translators decided to make the coin seem more familiar to their readers by using the name of the smallest copper coin in circulation in England at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “penny” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is the Greek form of “denarius,” the normal daily wage for a laborer in NT times. In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, for example, the master agreed to pay each man “a penny” for his day’s work (Mt 20:2, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “a denarius”). “Two pence” was the amount paid to the innkeeper by the good Samaritan (Lk 10:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because of the influence of the Roman denarius on British currency, the English penny has always been represented by the initial letter of its Roman equivalent.<\/p>\n<p>When the denarius, or “penny,” is recognized as a normal day’s wage, the astonishment of Jesus’ disciples when they were expected to find food for 5,000 people is better understood. They exclaimed that “two hundred pennyworth” of food would not feed such a crowd (Jn 6:7, <span>kjv<\/span>); that sum represented more than six months’ work.<\/p>\n<p>As might be expected, the silver and gold coinage current in Palestine during the time of Christ and for the remainder of the first century <span>AD<\/span> came primarily from Rome. The larger silver coins, however, that are referred to as tetradrachmas or staters in the NT came from Egypt, Phoenicia, or Antioch. The silver coin most frequently mentioned in the NT was the Roman denarius or the Greek drachma. Since few drachmas have been found in excavations dating from the first century, it is possible that the term was used in popular speech to refer to the denarius (plural, denarii), which was approximately the same size as the average Greek drachma. Actually, few Greek cities were permitted by their Roman overlords to continue minting drachmas.<\/p>\n<p>Caesar Augustus issued a decree for all the Roman world to be enrolled (Lk 2:1-2) in an empire-wide census just about the time that Jesus was born (6 or 5 <span>BC<\/span>). During his long reign (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14), Augustus authorized a large variety of denarii. They generally carried his likeness on their obverse with the inscription “Augustus, son of the divine one” (that is, son of Julius Caesar, who had been voted divine honors by the Roman Senate).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew 22:19 Jesus asked those trying to trick him with a question to show him a coin used to pay the government tax. They handed him a denarius bearing the portrait and inscription of Caesar (Mt 22:21). That coin could have been a denarius of Augustus, who had died some 16 years before, or of Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37), who was then on the throne. The silver denarius of Tiberius read “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.” The reverse showed the high priestess of the vestal order, flaming torch in hand, seated on her throne facing right. The title “pontif(ex) maxim(us)” referred to Tiberius rather than to the priestess.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COINS<\/h3>\n<p>Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>• Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarliestCoinsinPalestine\">Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Not until the time of Darius the Great (Darius I of Persia, 521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) did an official government-sponsored coinage become current in Palestine. Those earliest coins were oval-shaped gold darics, along with some silver coins.<\/p>\n<p>“Dram” is another term for the Persian gold daric. It is mentioned in Ezra 2:68-69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), where Zerubbabel’s caravan offered gold darics amounting to $30,000 toward rebuilding the temple. This passage is the first mention of an actual coin in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Almost at the same time that the Persian coins became current in Palestine, the widely popular silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma pieces) of Athens began to find their way to the mercantile centers of the Phoenician, Israelite, and Philistine coasts. Archaeologists have unearthed them in hoards throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. They continued to be used through the Persian period, which lasted until the Persian Empire was conquered by Alexander the Great in 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>. The coin was thick and heavy in appearance, but being of high-quality silver, it was in great demand for international commerce. Presumably Greek merchants found they could obtain the most desirable Asiatic imports in exchange for that particular form of currency.<\/p>\n<p>The silver didrachma, or half-drachma, in general use in the Greek Empire from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, continued through Roman times. After Alexander’s conquests, of course, Greek coins were used throughout the Macedonian Empire from present-day Yugoslavia to Pakistan. They were almost certainly employed for business purposes in Judea, for example.<\/p>\n<p>The shekels of the Phoenician trade centers of Tyre and Sidon, which had contributed substantially to the money supply in the Persian period, continued to be accepted in Judea even after the Alexandrian conquest. Typical of Sidon was a silver shekel portraying the battlements and walls of Sidon’s harbor, with a ship lying at anchor and two prancing lions in the foreground. A typical Tyrian shekel showed the god Baal robed and wearing a tiara. He was riding a hippocamp (winged horse with the tail of a fish) on the sea, with a fish or dolphin beneath. The reverse showed an Egyptian-type owl facing right, plus a shepherd’s crook and flail, both royal insignia in Egypt. The stater (or tetradrachma) found by the disciple Peter in a fish’s mouth and used to pay the temple tax for himself and Jesus may have been a Tyrian coin (Mt 17:27; <span>rsv<\/span> “shekel”).<\/p>\n<p>The talent, which represented a certain weight of gold or silver, was a common medium of exchange before the development of coinage. During the Maccabean period, John Hyrcanus saved the city of Jerusalem from destruction in 133 <span>BC<\/span> by paying a ransom from a 900-year-old hoard stored in David’s sepulcher. Three thousand talents of silver were sent to the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes in return for his promise to withdraw his troops. Treasure plundered from the temple by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is recorded as amounting to 17 talents. In gold talents that sum would represent the equivalent of the purchase price of about 15 large houses in a modern Western city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CoinagefromtheMaccabeestoHerodAgrippaI\">Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>Even though a native Jewish dynasty assumed the government of the Holy Land, it was many years before any indigenous Jewish coinage was minted. Presumably the inhabitants continued to use the coinage of Tyre and Egypt and of the Seleucid Empire for their commercial transactions. It was formerly supposed that silver shekels bearing images of the chalice and pomegranate cluster dated from the reign of Simon Maccabeus (142–134 <span>BC<\/span>); more recent archaeological discoveries prove that those coins date from the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>When the time came to issue the first Jewish coins, the die makers faced several problems. No mint was available, and no local people were skilled in design or die sinking. Coins current in the Near East at that time, which showed a high degree of design and craftsmanship, each bore the portrait head of a ruler or a god. For the Jews to make such coins would have meant contravening the second commandment, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). Not until well into Roman times was a coin struck in Palestine bearing a portrait head of a Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest coinage of the Hasmonean dynasty (the regnal name of the Maccabees) was the small bronze lepton (plural, lepta) of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Simon Maccabeus. The obverse showed two cornucopias with a pomegranate between them. That image symbolized the fertility that God had granted to the land. The reverse contained an inscription within a wreath, “John the high priest and the community of the Jews.” Small bronze lepta from the reign of Alexander Janneus, son of Hyrcanus I, have been found in great numbers. They were evidently much in demand for transactions at the temple, where money changers converted the gentile currency of visiting worshipers into the more acceptable Jewish money. Undoubtedly Hasmonean lepta were the coins Jesus scattered over the pavement of the Court of the Gentiles when he overturned the tables of the money changers (Mt 21:12; Jn 2:15). The lepton, or “mite,” of bronze or copper, worth <span>1<\/span>\/<span>400<\/span> of a shekel, was mentioned by Jesus on another occasion. He praised a widow’s gift of two mites to the temple treasury with the comment that the rich “contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living” (Mk 12:44, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Herod I came to power in Judea under the patronage of Mark Antony and secured the allegiance of the pro-Hasmonean Jews by marrying Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II, in 38 <span>BC<\/span>. Herod was empowered to strike his own bronze coins. Although he had a free hand to introduce innovations, Herod’s lepta followed tradition quite faithfully. The lepta carried an anchor with letters meaning “Of King Herod.” The reverse bore the double cornucopias with a pomegranate (or poppy) between them. Herod also minted a large bronze coin with what appears to be a Macedonian helmet on the obverse and a slender tripod on the reverse, along with an inscription of Herod’s name. Other designs he employed included wheat, eagles, and wreaths. He issued no silver coinage, relying instead on the available supplies of silver coins from Tyre, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Herod Archelaus assumed control. Lepta from that period bore a hanging cluster of grapes with a Greek inscription, and on the reverse a two-plumed Macedonian helmet. Grapes were an allusion to Israel as the Lord’s vine (Is 5).<\/p>\n<p>When Herod Antipas began his rule, also in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, he had no authority in Judea or Samaria. That portion of the former Jewish kingdom was placed under the control of Roman governors, or procurators, appointed directly by the emperor himself. Most familiar of the Roman procurators of Judea was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). His bronze coinage showed some bold innovations; his designs included representations of instruments used in the Roman religion such as the augur’s wand (resembling a shepherd’s crook in shape) and a ladle used in connection with broth prepared at sacrifices. The reverse bore a wreath enclosing the regnal date of <span>AD<\/span> 30–31. The two lepta put into the temple treasury (Lk 21:2) could have been lepta issued by Pilate or his predecessor. More likely, however, they were the Hasmonean lepta of Hyrcanus or Janneus, which were free of any taint of pagan Roman influence.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44), grandson of Herod the Great, continued the family tradition of ingratiating himself with the Roman overlords. Many of Herod Agrippa’s lepta have been found, showing a conical tasseled umbrella (perhaps symbolizing his royal protection of the people of Palestine) plus a Greek inscription indicating his reign. The reverse showed a bound cluster of three wheat ears and bore the regnal year as the legend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanCoinsinNewTestamentTimes\">Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman “as” came into circulation about 348 <span>BC<\/span> as a bronze coin bearing the figure of an animal. The coin was named after the Roman one-pound weight, equivalent to 12 ounces (340 grams) in our modern system. At the time of Christ’s birth, the Roman “as” minted for use in the Asiatic provinces bore the head of the emperor Augustus, with a laurel wreath on the reverse. A smaller bronze quadrans, or quarter “as,” was also minted by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Another bronze coin found in Greek and Roman currency was the assarion, first minted in the first century <span>BC<\/span> but still in use in the Christian period. One type was stamped with a winged sphinx, with an amphora on the reverse. It is still debated whether the coin described as a “farthing” in the <span>kjv<\/span> was in fact a Greek assarion or a Roman “as” or quadrans. The coin is mentioned four times in the NT, most familiarly in the question “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?” (see Mt 5:26; 10:29; Mk 12:42; Lk 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> “penny”). There is no doubt that the <span>kjv<\/span> translators decided to make the coin seem more familiar to their readers by using the name of the smallest copper coin in circulation in England at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “penny” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is the Greek form of “denarius,” the normal daily wage for a laborer in NT times. In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, for example, the master agreed to pay each man “a penny” for his day’s work (Mt 20:2, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “a denarius”). “Two pence” was the amount paid to the innkeeper by the good Samaritan (Lk 10:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because of the influence of the Roman denarius on British currency, the English penny has always been represented by the initial letter of its Roman equivalent.<\/p>\n<p>When the denarius, or “penny,” is recognized as a normal day’s wage, the astonishment of Jesus’ disciples when they were expected to find food for 5,000 people is better understood. They exclaimed that “two hundred pennyworth” of food would not feed such a crowd (Jn 6:7, <span>kjv<\/span>); that sum represented more than six months’ work.<\/p>\n<p>As might be expected, the silver and gold coinage current in Palestine during the time of Christ and for the remainder of the first century <span>AD<\/span> came primarily from Rome. The larger silver coins, however, that are referred to as tetradrachmas or staters in the NT came from Egypt, Phoenicia, or Antioch. The silver coin most frequently mentioned in the NT was the Roman denarius or the Greek drachma. Since few drachmas have been found in excavations dating from the first century, it is possible that the term was used in popular speech to refer to the denarius (plural, denarii), which was approximately the same size as the average Greek drachma. Actually, few Greek cities were permitted by their Roman overlords to continue minting drachmas.<\/p>\n<p>Caesar Augustus issued a decree for all the Roman world to be enrolled (Lk 2:1-2) in an empire-wide census just about the time that Jesus was born (6 or 5 <span>BC<\/span>). During his long reign (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14), Augustus authorized a large variety of denarii. They generally carried his likeness on their obverse with the inscription “Augustus, son of the divine one” (that is, son of Julius Caesar, who had been voted divine honors by the Roman Senate).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew 22:19 Jesus asked those trying to trick him with a question to show him a coin used to pay the government tax. They handed him a denarius bearing the portrait and inscription of Caesar (Mt 22:21). That coin could have been a denarius of Augustus, who had died some 16 years before, or of Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37), who was then on the throne. The silver denarius of Tiberius read “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.” The reverse showed the high priestess of the vestal order, flaming torch in hand, seated on her throne facing right. The title “pontif(ex) maxim(us)” referred to Tiberius rather than to the priestess.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COINS Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century BC. Preview • Earliest Coins in Palestine • Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I • Roman Coins in New Testament Times Earliest Coins in Palestine Not until the...","summary_en":"COINS Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century BC. Preview • Earliest Coins in Palestine • Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I • Roman Coins in New Testament Times Earliest Coins in Palestine Not until the...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29472,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Pence*","title_en":"Pence*","content_ro":"<h3>PENCE*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV form of denarius in Matthew 18:28, Mark 14:5, Luke 7:41, 10:35, and John 12:5. <em>See<\/em> Coins; Money.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PENCE*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV form of denarius in Matthew 18:28, Mark 14:5, Luke 7:41, 10:35, and John 12:5. <em>See<\/em> Coins; Money.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PENCE* KJV form of denarius in Matthew 18:28, Mark 14:5, Luke 7:41, 10:35, and John 12:5. See Coins; Money.","summary_en":"PENCE* KJV form of denarius in Matthew 18:28, Mark 14:5, Luke 7:41, 10:35, and John 12:5. See Coins; Money.","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"36":[{"id":25237,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mercy","title_en":"Mercy","content_ro":"<h3>MERCY<\/h3>\n<p>A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meaning involved, such as “kindness,” “lovingkindness,” “goodness,” “grace,” “favor,” “pity,” “compassion,” and “steadfast love.” Prominent in the concept of mercy is the compassionate disposition to forgive offenders or adversaries and to help or spare them in their sorry plight.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalSignificance\">Theological Significance<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of the concept of mercy is the love of God, which is freely manifested in his gracious saving acts on behalf of those to whom he has pledged himself in covenant relationship. In the OT it was his chosen people Israel whom he elected to be his own and to whom he showed mercy (Ex 33:19; Is 54:10; 63:9). God persistently puts up with his disobedient and wayward people and continuously seeks them out to draw them back to himself. The psalmist describes God as a father who pities his children who revere and trust him (Ps 103:13). Hosea pictures God as a loving father who looks down from heaven with a yearning heart of compassion upon his rebellious and wayward people (Hos 11; cf. Jer 31:20). He also regards Israel as an unfaithful and adulterous wife whom God loves as a faithful husband in spite of her apostate and sinful condition (Hos 1–3; cf. Is 54:4-8). Isaiah depicts God as a mother who has compassion on the son of her womb (Is 49:15). These pictures reveal God’s mercy in rich and different ways. Other dimensions include forgiveness and restoration to favor (2 Kgs 13:23; Is 54:8; Jl 2:18-32; Mi 7:18-20), and deliverance from distress and perils (Neh 9:19-21; Pss 40:11-17; 69:16-36; 79:8-9; Is 49:10).<\/p>\n<p>Because of what Israel as a covenant nation had learned about the steadfast love and faithfulness of God, devout Jews instinctively lifted their voices in petition for divine mercy and forgiveness in times of need, eloquently expressed in the penitential psalms (Pss 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143), as well as other OT passages (Ex 34:6; Neh 9:17; Pss 57; 79; 86; 123; Is 33:1-6; Dn 9:3-19; Jl 2:13). It is the remembrance of God’s mercy that gives the repentant person the hope and assurance of divine favor and of reconciliation with the offended Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT a very descriptive Greek word is used for Jesus’ mercy toward the needy (Mt 9:36; 14:14; 20:34). It expresses his pity and compassion by means of an intense verb literally translated “to be moved in one’s bowels.” The Hebrews regarded the bowels as the center of the affections, especially that of the most tender kindness. Jesus was described as being deeply moved in his inner feeling of benevolence toward the needy and spontaneously acting to relieve their suffering—to heal (Mt 20:34; Mk 1:41), to raise the dead (Lk 7:13), and to feed the hungry (Mt 15:32).<\/p>\n<p>The OT concept of God’s mercy expressed in his faithfulness to the covenant people is found also in the NT (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78; Eph 2:4; 1 Tm 1:2; 1 Pt 1:3; 2:10). The most characteristic use of mercy in the NT is that of God’s provision of salvation for mankind in Jesus Christ (Rom 11:30-32; Eph 2:4). God is “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor 1:3), which he bestows on those who believe in his Son. It is because he is “so rich in mercy” that he saved those who are spiritually dead and doomed by their sins (Eph 2:4-6). It is out of God’s mercy that one is forgiven and granted eternal life (1 Tm 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PeoplesResponsibilitytoShowMercytoOthers\">People’s Responsibility to Show Mercy to Others<\/p>\n<p>Because God has freely extended his mercy irrespective of worthiness or faithfulness, people are to respond by showing mercy to others, even though they do not deserve it or seek it. Indeed, people are commanded to be merciful, especially to the poor, the needy, widows, and orphans (Prv 14:31; 19:17; Mi 6:8; Zec 7:9-10; Col 3:12). God regards mercy more than the ritual sacrifice (Mt 9:13). God’s mercy in Christ actually puts people under obligation to act toward others as God himself has acted toward them. The Lord made mercy a foundation for his teaching (Mt 5:7; 9:13; 12:7; 23:23; Lk 6:36; 10:37; Jas 3:17). His coming was anticipated and announced in the context of the mercy that would characterize his mission (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78).<\/p>\n<p>Members of the Christian church are to show compassion and practical concern for each other. They are to give aid and relief, love and comfort to one another, as Christ freely gave to them in their need. The apostle James teaches the essential nature of such good works as being of the very essence of genuine faith (Jas 2:14-26). It was the mercy that the good Samaritan had toward the man who was beaten and robbed that was singled out by the Lord for special commendation (Lk 10:36-37). To be full of mercy is a distinguishing virtue of the citizens of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 5:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Love.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MERCY<\/h3>\n<p>A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meaning involved, such as “kindness,” “lovingkindness,” “goodness,” “grace,” “favor,” “pity,” “compassion,” and “steadfast love.” Prominent in the concept of mercy is the compassionate disposition to forgive offenders or adversaries and to help or spare them in their sorry plight.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalSignificance\">Theological Significance<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of the concept of mercy is the love of God, which is freely manifested in his gracious saving acts on behalf of those to whom he has pledged himself in covenant relationship. In the OT it was his chosen people Israel whom he elected to be his own and to whom he showed mercy (Ex 33:19; Is 54:10; 63:9). God persistently puts up with his disobedient and wayward people and continuously seeks them out to draw them back to himself. The psalmist describes God as a father who pities his children who revere and trust him (Ps 103:13). Hosea pictures God as a loving father who looks down from heaven with a yearning heart of compassion upon his rebellious and wayward people (Hos 11; cf. Jer 31:20). He also regards Israel as an unfaithful and adulterous wife whom God loves as a faithful husband in spite of her apostate and sinful condition (Hos 1–3; cf. Is 54:4-8). Isaiah depicts God as a mother who has compassion on the son of her womb (Is 49:15). These pictures reveal God’s mercy in rich and different ways. Other dimensions include forgiveness and restoration to favor (2 Kgs 13:23; Is 54:8; Jl 2:18-32; Mi 7:18-20), and deliverance from distress and perils (Neh 9:19-21; Pss 40:11-17; 69:16-36; 79:8-9; Is 49:10).<\/p>\n<p>Because of what Israel as a covenant nation had learned about the steadfast love and faithfulness of God, devout Jews instinctively lifted their voices in petition for divine mercy and forgiveness in times of need, eloquently expressed in the penitential psalms (Pss 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143), as well as other OT passages (Ex 34:6; Neh 9:17; Pss 57; 79; 86; 123; Is 33:1-6; Dn 9:3-19; Jl 2:13). It is the remembrance of God’s mercy that gives the repentant person the hope and assurance of divine favor and of reconciliation with the offended Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT a very descriptive Greek word is used for Jesus’ mercy toward the needy (Mt 9:36; 14:14; 20:34). It expresses his pity and compassion by means of an intense verb literally translated “to be moved in one’s bowels.” The Hebrews regarded the bowels as the center of the affections, especially that of the most tender kindness. Jesus was described as being deeply moved in his inner feeling of benevolence toward the needy and spontaneously acting to relieve their suffering—to heal (Mt 20:34; Mk 1:41), to raise the dead (Lk 7:13), and to feed the hungry (Mt 15:32).<\/p>\n<p>The OT concept of God’s mercy expressed in his faithfulness to the covenant people is found also in the NT (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78; Eph 2:4; 1 Tm 1:2; 1 Pt 1:3; 2:10). The most characteristic use of mercy in the NT is that of God’s provision of salvation for mankind in Jesus Christ (Rom 11:30-32; Eph 2:4). God is “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor 1:3), which he bestows on those who believe in his Son. It is because he is “so rich in mercy” that he saved those who are spiritually dead and doomed by their sins (Eph 2:4-6). It is out of God’s mercy that one is forgiven and granted eternal life (1 Tm 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PeoplesResponsibilitytoShowMercytoOthers\">People’s Responsibility to Show Mercy to Others<\/p>\n<p>Because God has freely extended his mercy irrespective of worthiness or faithfulness, people are to respond by showing mercy to others, even though they do not deserve it or seek it. Indeed, people are commanded to be merciful, especially to the poor, the needy, widows, and orphans (Prv 14:31; 19:17; Mi 6:8; Zec 7:9-10; Col 3:12). God regards mercy more than the ritual sacrifice (Mt 9:13). God’s mercy in Christ actually puts people under obligation to act toward others as God himself has acted toward them. The Lord made mercy a foundation for his teaching (Mt 5:7; 9:13; 12:7; 23:23; Lk 6:36; 10:37; Jas 3:17). His coming was anticipated and announced in the context of the mercy that would characterize his mission (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78).<\/p>\n<p>Members of the Christian church are to show compassion and practical concern for each other. They are to give aid and relief, love and comfort to one another, as Christ freely gave to them in their need. The apostle James teaches the essential nature of such good works as being of the very essence of genuine faith (Jas 2:14-26). It was the mercy that the good Samaritan had toward the man who was beaten and robbed that was singled out by the Lord for special commendation (Lk 10:36-37). To be full of mercy is a distinguishing virtue of the citizens of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 5:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Love.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MERCY A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4). The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meani...","summary_en":"MERCY A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4). The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meani...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27295,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Neighbor","title_en":"Neighbor","content_ro":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","summary_en":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"37":[{"id":25234,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mercy","title_en":"Mercy","content_ro":"<h3>MERCY<\/h3>\n<p>A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meaning involved, such as “kindness,” “lovingkindness,” “goodness,” “grace,” “favor,” “pity,” “compassion,” and “steadfast love.” Prominent in the concept of mercy is the compassionate disposition to forgive offenders or adversaries and to help or spare them in their sorry plight.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalSignificance\">Theological Significance<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of the concept of mercy is the love of God, which is freely manifested in his gracious saving acts on behalf of those to whom he has pledged himself in covenant relationship. In the OT it was his chosen people Israel whom he elected to be his own and to whom he showed mercy (Ex 33:19; Is 54:10; 63:9). God persistently puts up with his disobedient and wayward people and continuously seeks them out to draw them back to himself. The psalmist describes God as a father who pities his children who revere and trust him (Ps 103:13). Hosea pictures God as a loving father who looks down from heaven with a yearning heart of compassion upon his rebellious and wayward people (Hos 11; cf. Jer 31:20). He also regards Israel as an unfaithful and adulterous wife whom God loves as a faithful husband in spite of her apostate and sinful condition (Hos 1–3; cf. Is 54:4-8). Isaiah depicts God as a mother who has compassion on the son of her womb (Is 49:15). These pictures reveal God’s mercy in rich and different ways. Other dimensions include forgiveness and restoration to favor (2 Kgs 13:23; Is 54:8; Jl 2:18-32; Mi 7:18-20), and deliverance from distress and perils (Neh 9:19-21; Pss 40:11-17; 69:16-36; 79:8-9; Is 49:10).<\/p>\n<p>Because of what Israel as a covenant nation had learned about the steadfast love and faithfulness of God, devout Jews instinctively lifted their voices in petition for divine mercy and forgiveness in times of need, eloquently expressed in the penitential psalms (Pss 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143), as well as other OT passages (Ex 34:6; Neh 9:17; Pss 57; 79; 86; 123; Is 33:1-6; Dn 9:3-19; Jl 2:13). It is the remembrance of God’s mercy that gives the repentant person the hope and assurance of divine favor and of reconciliation with the offended Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT a very descriptive Greek word is used for Jesus’ mercy toward the needy (Mt 9:36; 14:14; 20:34). It expresses his pity and compassion by means of an intense verb literally translated “to be moved in one’s bowels.” The Hebrews regarded the bowels as the center of the affections, especially that of the most tender kindness. Jesus was described as being deeply moved in his inner feeling of benevolence toward the needy and spontaneously acting to relieve their suffering—to heal (Mt 20:34; Mk 1:41), to raise the dead (Lk 7:13), and to feed the hungry (Mt 15:32).<\/p>\n<p>The OT concept of God’s mercy expressed in his faithfulness to the covenant people is found also in the NT (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78; Eph 2:4; 1 Tm 1:2; 1 Pt 1:3; 2:10). The most characteristic use of mercy in the NT is that of God’s provision of salvation for mankind in Jesus Christ (Rom 11:30-32; Eph 2:4). God is “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor 1:3), which he bestows on those who believe in his Son. It is because he is “so rich in mercy” that he saved those who are spiritually dead and doomed by their sins (Eph 2:4-6). It is out of God’s mercy that one is forgiven and granted eternal life (1 Tm 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PeoplesResponsibilitytoShowMercytoOthers\">People’s Responsibility to Show Mercy to Others<\/p>\n<p>Because God has freely extended his mercy irrespective of worthiness or faithfulness, people are to respond by showing mercy to others, even though they do not deserve it or seek it. Indeed, people are commanded to be merciful, especially to the poor, the needy, widows, and orphans (Prv 14:31; 19:17; Mi 6:8; Zec 7:9-10; Col 3:12). God regards mercy more than the ritual sacrifice (Mt 9:13). God’s mercy in Christ actually puts people under obligation to act toward others as God himself has acted toward them. The Lord made mercy a foundation for his teaching (Mt 5:7; 9:13; 12:7; 23:23; Lk 6:36; 10:37; Jas 3:17). His coming was anticipated and announced in the context of the mercy that would characterize his mission (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78).<\/p>\n<p>Members of the Christian church are to show compassion and practical concern for each other. They are to give aid and relief, love and comfort to one another, as Christ freely gave to them in their need. The apostle James teaches the essential nature of such good works as being of the very essence of genuine faith (Jas 2:14-26). It was the mercy that the good Samaritan had toward the man who was beaten and robbed that was singled out by the Lord for special commendation (Lk 10:36-37). To be full of mercy is a distinguishing virtue of the citizens of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 5:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Love.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MERCY<\/h3>\n<p>A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meaning involved, such as “kindness,” “lovingkindness,” “goodness,” “grace,” “favor,” “pity,” “compassion,” and “steadfast love.” Prominent in the concept of mercy is the compassionate disposition to forgive offenders or adversaries and to help or spare them in their sorry plight.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalSignificance\">Theological Significance<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of the concept of mercy is the love of God, which is freely manifested in his gracious saving acts on behalf of those to whom he has pledged himself in covenant relationship. In the OT it was his chosen people Israel whom he elected to be his own and to whom he showed mercy (Ex 33:19; Is 54:10; 63:9). God persistently puts up with his disobedient and wayward people and continuously seeks them out to draw them back to himself. The psalmist describes God as a father who pities his children who revere and trust him (Ps 103:13). Hosea pictures God as a loving father who looks down from heaven with a yearning heart of compassion upon his rebellious and wayward people (Hos 11; cf. Jer 31:20). He also regards Israel as an unfaithful and adulterous wife whom God loves as a faithful husband in spite of her apostate and sinful condition (Hos 1–3; cf. Is 54:4-8). Isaiah depicts God as a mother who has compassion on the son of her womb (Is 49:15). These pictures reveal God’s mercy in rich and different ways. Other dimensions include forgiveness and restoration to favor (2 Kgs 13:23; Is 54:8; Jl 2:18-32; Mi 7:18-20), and deliverance from distress and perils (Neh 9:19-21; Pss 40:11-17; 69:16-36; 79:8-9; Is 49:10).<\/p>\n<p>Because of what Israel as a covenant nation had learned about the steadfast love and faithfulness of God, devout Jews instinctively lifted their voices in petition for divine mercy and forgiveness in times of need, eloquently expressed in the penitential psalms (Pss 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143), as well as other OT passages (Ex 34:6; Neh 9:17; Pss 57; 79; 86; 123; Is 33:1-6; Dn 9:3-19; Jl 2:13). It is the remembrance of God’s mercy that gives the repentant person the hope and assurance of divine favor and of reconciliation with the offended Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT a very descriptive Greek word is used for Jesus’ mercy toward the needy (Mt 9:36; 14:14; 20:34). It expresses his pity and compassion by means of an intense verb literally translated “to be moved in one’s bowels.” The Hebrews regarded the bowels as the center of the affections, especially that of the most tender kindness. Jesus was described as being deeply moved in his inner feeling of benevolence toward the needy and spontaneously acting to relieve their suffering—to heal (Mt 20:34; Mk 1:41), to raise the dead (Lk 7:13), and to feed the hungry (Mt 15:32).<\/p>\n<p>The OT concept of God’s mercy expressed in his faithfulness to the covenant people is found also in the NT (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78; Eph 2:4; 1 Tm 1:2; 1 Pt 1:3; 2:10). The most characteristic use of mercy in the NT is that of God’s provision of salvation for mankind in Jesus Christ (Rom 11:30-32; Eph 2:4). God is “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor 1:3), which he bestows on those who believe in his Son. It is because he is “so rich in mercy” that he saved those who are spiritually dead and doomed by their sins (Eph 2:4-6). It is out of God’s mercy that one is forgiven and granted eternal life (1 Tm 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PeoplesResponsibilitytoShowMercytoOthers\">People’s Responsibility to Show Mercy to Others<\/p>\n<p>Because God has freely extended his mercy irrespective of worthiness or faithfulness, people are to respond by showing mercy to others, even though they do not deserve it or seek it. Indeed, people are commanded to be merciful, especially to the poor, the needy, widows, and orphans (Prv 14:31; 19:17; Mi 6:8; Zec 7:9-10; Col 3:12). God regards mercy more than the ritual sacrifice (Mt 9:13). God’s mercy in Christ actually puts people under obligation to act toward others as God himself has acted toward them. The Lord made mercy a foundation for his teaching (Mt 5:7; 9:13; 12:7; 23:23; Lk 6:36; 10:37; Jas 3:17). His coming was anticipated and announced in the context of the mercy that would characterize his mission (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78).<\/p>\n<p>Members of the Christian church are to show compassion and practical concern for each other. They are to give aid and relief, love and comfort to one another, as Christ freely gave to them in their need. The apostle James teaches the essential nature of such good works as being of the very essence of genuine faith (Jas 2:14-26). It was the mercy that the good Samaritan had toward the man who was beaten and robbed that was singled out by the Lord for special commendation (Lk 10:36-37). To be full of mercy is a distinguishing virtue of the citizens of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 5:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Love.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MERCY A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4). The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meani...","summary_en":"MERCY A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4). The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meani...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33663,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Samaritans","title_en":"Samaritans","content_ro":"<h3>SAMARITANS<\/h3>\n<p>Schismatic group from the Jews. The group resided north of Judea and south of Galilee in hostile tension with its Jewish neighbors. Jesus’ attitude toward this despised group radically contrasted with contemporary sentiment.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Origins of the Sect<\/p>\n<p>• Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews<\/p>\n<p>• Samaritan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus and the Samaritans<\/p>\n<p>• Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsoftheSect\">Origins of the Sect<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to determine precisely when the Samaritan sect arose and when the final break with Judaism occurred. The OT conception of the origin of the Samaritan sect is that they stemmed from repopulated foreign peoples whose worship of God was only a veneer for underlying idolatry. According to 2 Kings 17, the Samaritan sect arose from the exchange of peoples following Israel’s defeat by Assyria in 722 <span>BC<\/span>. Removing the Israelites from the land, the king of Assyria repopulated the area with conquered peoples from Babylon, Cuthah, and various other nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Samaritans offer a vastly different interpretation of their origin. They claim descent from the Jewish tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (see Jn 4:12) and hold that the exile of Israelites in 722 <span>BC<\/span> by Assyria was neither full-scale nor permanent. To account for the mutual hostility that developed between their group and the Jews, the Samaritan version holds that the Jews were guilty of apostasy, setting up heretical sanctuaries during the time of Eli, rather than staying with the only holy place on Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans therefore considered themselves true Israelites in descent and worship.<\/p>\n<p>From Assyrian records of this period, an exchange of population is in fact affirmed for the northern kingdom, but apparently a total deportation was not carried out (see 2 Chr 34:9). This would suggest that there were two elements in the land: first, the native Israelite remnant not exiled; and second, the foreign exiles who were gradually won over to the faith of the native residents, although syncretism no doubt existed during the early period of assimilation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RelationsbetweentheSamaritansandtheJews\">Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews<\/p>\n<p>The history of relations between the Samaritans—situated on the north around Mt Gerizim (their holy mountain), Shechem, and Samaria—and Jewish populations in Judea and then later in Galilee is one of fluctuating tensions. The ancient tension between the northern and southern kingdoms was revived with the return of exiles to Jerusalem under the Persian ruler Cyrus’s edict (c. 538 <span>BC<\/span>). The entire southern area was at the time being governed from Samaria in the north by Sanballat, a native ruler of Palestine under Persian authority. The return of exiles to Jerusalem, particularly with their intentions of rebuilding the Jerusalem temple, posed an obvious political threat to his leadership in the north (Ezr 4:7-24; Neh 4:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>Opposition was at first politically motivated but became religious when sometime later, possibly in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, a rival temple was erected on Mt Gerizim. An example of Jewish hostility toward the Samaritans about this time comes from Ecclesiasticus 50:25-26 (written approximately 200 <span>BC<\/span>), where the Samaritans are placed below the Edomites and Philistines in esteem and are termed a “foolish people” (cf. Test. Levi 7:2).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish disregard for the Samaritans was increased by the Samaritans’ lack of resistance to Antiochus Epiphanes’ campaign (c. 167 <span>BC<\/span>) to promote Hellenistic worship in the area. While part of the Jewish community resisted the transforming of the Jerusalem temple to a temple for Zeus (1 Macc 1:62-64) and eventually followed the Maccabees in revolt (1 Macc 2:42-43), sources suggest that the Samaritans did not (see 1 Macc 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>Poor relations came to a climax during the brief period of Jewish independence under the Hasmoneans, when the Jewish ruler, John Hyrcanus, marched against Shechem, conquering and destroying the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim (c. 128 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Under Herod the Great, Samaria’s fortunes improved, although animosity still continued between the Samaritans and Jews in Judea and Galilee. Holding the Jerusalem temple to be a false cultic center, and excluded from the inner courts by the Jerusalem authorities, a group of Samaritans desecrated the Jerusalem temple in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 6 by spreading human bones within the temple porches and sanctuary during Passover. Hostility toward Galilean Jews traveling through Samaria on the way to Jerusalem for various feasts was also not uncommon (Lk 9:51-53).<\/p>\n<p>This animosity continued in Jesus’ day. Both groups excluded the other from their respective cultic centers, the Jerusalem temple and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans, for example, were forbidden access to the inner courts of the temple, and any offering they might give was considered as if it were from a Gentile. Thus, although probably more accurately defined as “schismatics,” it appears Samaritans were in practice treated as Gentiles. All marriage between the groups was therefore forbidden, and social relations were greatly restricted (Jn 4:9). With such proscribed separation, it is not surprising that any interaction between the two groups was strained. The mere term Samaritan was one of contempt on the lips of Jews (8:48), and among some scribes it possibly would not even be uttered (see the apparent circumlocution in Lk 10:37). The disciples’ reaction to the Samaritan refusal of lodging (9:51-55) is a good example of the animosity felt by Jews for Samaritans at the time.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is less evidence for similar attitudes from the Samaritan side, we can assume they existed. It is probable to speculate, therefore, that the Samaritan shunning of hospitality in Luke 9:51-55 was not uncommon toward other Jews whose “face was set toward Jerusalem.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SamaritanBeliefs\">Samaritan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>The main beliefs of the Samaritans demonstrate both the close affinities with and obvious divergences from mainstream Judaism. They held in common with Judaism a strong monotheistic faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In contrast, however, there was an elevating of Mt Gerizim in the north as the only holy place for sacrifice, based on several divergent passages in Deuteronomy and Exodus in the Samaritan text. Mt Gerizim came to be identified with the site of Abel’s first altar (Gn 4:4), the site of Noah’s sacrifice after the Flood (8:20), the meeting place of Abraham and Melchizedek (14:18), the site of Isaac’s intended sacrifice (ch 22), and many other associations.<\/p>\n<p>The Samaritans held only the first five biblical books (Pentateuch) to be inspired and based their dogma and practice exclusively on these books. Such a narrow canon not only determined the direction of Samaritan theology but further separated them from contemporary Jewish thought. Moses, for example, was more highly exalted by the Samaritans than by the Jews. He was considered not only the chief prophet but also, in later thought, was described as the choicest of men, preexisting from Creation, interceding with God for Israel, and being to man “the light of the world.” The messianic hope of Samaritan theology also reflects this narrow canon. A Messiah from the house of David could not be anticipated, as no evidence for such could be found in the Pentateuch. Rather, the Samaritans awaited a “prophet like Moses” based on Deuteronomy 18:15-18. This anticipated prophet was also designated the “Taheb,” the Restorer, for he would in the last days restore proper cultic worship on Mt Gerizim and bring the worship of the heathen to that site.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear, therefore, that it was primarily the claim of supremacy for Mt Gerizim that separated this group theologically and culturally from their Jewish neighbors.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandtheSamaritans\">Jesus and the Samaritans<\/p>\n<p>The common Jewish perspective on Samaritans as being nearly Gentile was evidently held to some extent by Jesus as well. Jesus refers to the Samaritan leper as “this foreigner” (Lk 17:18) and prohibits his disciples, during their commissioning, from taking the message of the kingdom to either the Samaritans or the Gentiles (Mt 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the overwhelming evidence in the Gospels is that Jesus’ attitude toward the Samaritans differed radically from that of his Jewish contemporaries. When his disciples display the usual Jewish animosity in asking to have the “fire of judgment” rain down upon the inhospitable Samaritans, Jesus “rebuked them” (Lk 9:55). Moreover, he did not refuse to heal the Samaritan leper but honored him as the only one of the ten who remembered to give glory to God (17:11-19). So also in the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:30-37) Jesus clearly breaks through the traditional prejudices in portraying the despised Samaritan, not the respected Jewish priest or Levite, as the true neighbor to the man in need. Here as elsewhere, Jesus, in confronting his audience with God’s demand, breaks through traditional definitions of “righteous” and “outcast.”<\/p>\n<p>John 4:4-43 records not only the fascinating exchange between Jesus and the Samaritan woman but also Jesus’ subsequent two-day stay in the town of Sychar, a Samaritan city. Here we see Jesus not only risking ritual uncleanness by contact with the Samaritan woman at the well (vv 7-9) but also offering the gift of salvation to her (v 10) and the entire Samaritan town (vv 39-41). Through Jesus’ knowledge of her marital life (vv 16-18), the woman concludes he must be a “prophet.” Remembering that the Samaritans were expecting a “prophet like Moses” in the last days, it is possible that the woman was wondering if Jesus was their long-awaited prophetic Messiah (vv 19, 25-26). Jesus not only breaks through the rigid animosity of Jews toward Samaritans by doing the unthinkable in staying with this despised people, but he also accepts their faith in him as “Messiah” (v 26) and “Savior of the world” (v 42). Here, as with his association with the outcasts of Jewish society, Jesus redefines righteousness not according to descent or religious practice but according to faith in himself. In so doing, he shatters the racial and cultural distinctions of his day and lays the foundation for the gospel’s subsequent spread to the entire gentile world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SamariaintheMissionoftheEarlyChurch\">Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In the great commission given prior to his ascension, Jesus told his disciples to take the gospel to Samaria (Acts 1:8). The missionary activity of the early church did indeed include this region. When, following the martyrdom of Stephen, many Christians were forced to leave Jerusalem (8:1), one such Christian, Philip, spread the gospel in the city of Samaria (v 5). The response was so great to the miracles performed that Peter and John (representing the apostles in Jerusalem) were sent to investigate and to confirm the presence of the Holy Spirit among them. Evidence from the second century <span>AD<\/span> suggests, however, that Christianity did not gain a strong foothold among the Samaritans. For the most part, the Samaritans retained their own religion. A small remnant of the Samaritan sect continues to exist to this day, living near Mt Gerizim (Shechem) and in various cities in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament); Samaria.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SAMARITANS<\/h3>\n<p>Schismatic group from the Jews. The group resided north of Judea and south of Galilee in hostile tension with its Jewish neighbors. Jesus’ attitude toward this despised group radically contrasted with contemporary sentiment.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Origins of the Sect<\/p>\n<p>• Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews<\/p>\n<p>• Samaritan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus and the Samaritans<\/p>\n<p>• Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsoftheSect\">Origins of the Sect<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to determine precisely when the Samaritan sect arose and when the final break with Judaism occurred. The OT conception of the origin of the Samaritan sect is that they stemmed from repopulated foreign peoples whose worship of God was only a veneer for underlying idolatry. According to 2 Kings 17, the Samaritan sect arose from the exchange of peoples following Israel’s defeat by Assyria in 722 <span>BC<\/span>. Removing the Israelites from the land, the king of Assyria repopulated the area with conquered peoples from Babylon, Cuthah, and various other nations.<\/p>\n<p>The Samaritans offer a vastly different interpretation of their origin. They claim descent from the Jewish tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (see Jn 4:12) and hold that the exile of Israelites in 722 <span>BC<\/span> by Assyria was neither full-scale nor permanent. To account for the mutual hostility that developed between their group and the Jews, the Samaritan version holds that the Jews were guilty of apostasy, setting up heretical sanctuaries during the time of Eli, rather than staying with the only holy place on Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans therefore considered themselves true Israelites in descent and worship.<\/p>\n<p>From Assyrian records of this period, an exchange of population is in fact affirmed for the northern kingdom, but apparently a total deportation was not carried out (see 2 Chr 34:9). This would suggest that there were two elements in the land: first, the native Israelite remnant not exiled; and second, the foreign exiles who were gradually won over to the faith of the native residents, although syncretism no doubt existed during the early period of assimilation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RelationsbetweentheSamaritansandtheJews\">Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews<\/p>\n<p>The history of relations between the Samaritans—situated on the north around Mt Gerizim (their holy mountain), Shechem, and Samaria—and Jewish populations in Judea and then later in Galilee is one of fluctuating tensions. The ancient tension between the northern and southern kingdoms was revived with the return of exiles to Jerusalem under the Persian ruler Cyrus’s edict (c. 538 <span>BC<\/span>). The entire southern area was at the time being governed from Samaria in the north by Sanballat, a native ruler of Palestine under Persian authority. The return of exiles to Jerusalem, particularly with their intentions of rebuilding the Jerusalem temple, posed an obvious political threat to his leadership in the north (Ezr 4:7-24; Neh 4:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>Opposition was at first politically motivated but became religious when sometime later, possibly in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, a rival temple was erected on Mt Gerizim. An example of Jewish hostility toward the Samaritans about this time comes from Ecclesiasticus 50:25-26 (written approximately 200 <span>BC<\/span>), where the Samaritans are placed below the Edomites and Philistines in esteem and are termed a “foolish people” (cf. Test. Levi 7:2).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish disregard for the Samaritans was increased by the Samaritans’ lack of resistance to Antiochus Epiphanes’ campaign (c. 167 <span>BC<\/span>) to promote Hellenistic worship in the area. While part of the Jewish community resisted the transforming of the Jerusalem temple to a temple for Zeus (1 Macc 1:62-64) and eventually followed the Maccabees in revolt (1 Macc 2:42-43), sources suggest that the Samaritans did not (see 1 Macc 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>Poor relations came to a climax during the brief period of Jewish independence under the Hasmoneans, when the Jewish ruler, John Hyrcanus, marched against Shechem, conquering and destroying the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim (c. 128 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Under Herod the Great, Samaria’s fortunes improved, although animosity still continued between the Samaritans and Jews in Judea and Galilee. Holding the Jerusalem temple to be a false cultic center, and excluded from the inner courts by the Jerusalem authorities, a group of Samaritans desecrated the Jerusalem temple in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 6 by spreading human bones within the temple porches and sanctuary during Passover. Hostility toward Galilean Jews traveling through Samaria on the way to Jerusalem for various feasts was also not uncommon (Lk 9:51-53).<\/p>\n<p>This animosity continued in Jesus’ day. Both groups excluded the other from their respective cultic centers, the Jerusalem temple and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans, for example, were forbidden access to the inner courts of the temple, and any offering they might give was considered as if it were from a Gentile. Thus, although probably more accurately defined as “schismatics,” it appears Samaritans were in practice treated as Gentiles. All marriage between the groups was therefore forbidden, and social relations were greatly restricted (Jn 4:9). With such proscribed separation, it is not surprising that any interaction between the two groups was strained. The mere term Samaritan was one of contempt on the lips of Jews (8:48), and among some scribes it possibly would not even be uttered (see the apparent circumlocution in Lk 10:37). The disciples’ reaction to the Samaritan refusal of lodging (9:51-55) is a good example of the animosity felt by Jews for Samaritans at the time.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is less evidence for similar attitudes from the Samaritan side, we can assume they existed. It is probable to speculate, therefore, that the Samaritan shunning of hospitality in Luke 9:51-55 was not uncommon toward other Jews whose “face was set toward Jerusalem.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SamaritanBeliefs\">Samaritan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>The main beliefs of the Samaritans demonstrate both the close affinities with and obvious divergences from mainstream Judaism. They held in common with Judaism a strong monotheistic faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In contrast, however, there was an elevating of Mt Gerizim in the north as the only holy place for sacrifice, based on several divergent passages in Deuteronomy and Exodus in the Samaritan text. Mt Gerizim came to be identified with the site of Abel’s first altar (Gn 4:4), the site of Noah’s sacrifice after the Flood (8:20), the meeting place of Abraham and Melchizedek (14:18), the site of Isaac’s intended sacrifice (ch 22), and many other associations.<\/p>\n<p>The Samaritans held only the first five biblical books (Pentateuch) to be inspired and based their dogma and practice exclusively on these books. Such a narrow canon not only determined the direction of Samaritan theology but further separated them from contemporary Jewish thought. Moses, for example, was more highly exalted by the Samaritans than by the Jews. He was considered not only the chief prophet but also, in later thought, was described as the choicest of men, preexisting from Creation, interceding with God for Israel, and being to man “the light of the world.” The messianic hope of Samaritan theology also reflects this narrow canon. A Messiah from the house of David could not be anticipated, as no evidence for such could be found in the Pentateuch. Rather, the Samaritans awaited a “prophet like Moses” based on Deuteronomy 18:15-18. This anticipated prophet was also designated the “Taheb,” the Restorer, for he would in the last days restore proper cultic worship on Mt Gerizim and bring the worship of the heathen to that site.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear, therefore, that it was primarily the claim of supremacy for Mt Gerizim that separated this group theologically and culturally from their Jewish neighbors.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandtheSamaritans\">Jesus and the Samaritans<\/p>\n<p>The common Jewish perspective on Samaritans as being nearly Gentile was evidently held to some extent by Jesus as well. Jesus refers to the Samaritan leper as “this foreigner” (Lk 17:18) and prohibits his disciples, during their commissioning, from taking the message of the kingdom to either the Samaritans or the Gentiles (Mt 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the overwhelming evidence in the Gospels is that Jesus’ attitude toward the Samaritans differed radically from that of his Jewish contemporaries. When his disciples display the usual Jewish animosity in asking to have the “fire of judgment” rain down upon the inhospitable Samaritans, Jesus “rebuked them” (Lk 9:55). Moreover, he did not refuse to heal the Samaritan leper but honored him as the only one of the ten who remembered to give glory to God (17:11-19). So also in the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:30-37) Jesus clearly breaks through the traditional prejudices in portraying the despised Samaritan, not the respected Jewish priest or Levite, as the true neighbor to the man in need. Here as elsewhere, Jesus, in confronting his audience with God’s demand, breaks through traditional definitions of “righteous” and “outcast.”<\/p>\n<p>John 4:4-43 records not only the fascinating exchange between Jesus and the Samaritan woman but also Jesus’ subsequent two-day stay in the town of Sychar, a Samaritan city. Here we see Jesus not only risking ritual uncleanness by contact with the Samaritan woman at the well (vv 7-9) but also offering the gift of salvation to her (v 10) and the entire Samaritan town (vv 39-41). Through Jesus’ knowledge of her marital life (vv 16-18), the woman concludes he must be a “prophet.” Remembering that the Samaritans were expecting a “prophet like Moses” in the last days, it is possible that the woman was wondering if Jesus was their long-awaited prophetic Messiah (vv 19, 25-26). Jesus not only breaks through the rigid animosity of Jews toward Samaritans by doing the unthinkable in staying with this despised people, but he also accepts their faith in him as “Messiah” (v 26) and “Savior of the world” (v 42). Here, as with his association with the outcasts of Jewish society, Jesus redefines righteousness not according to descent or religious practice but according to faith in himself. In so doing, he shatters the racial and cultural distinctions of his day and lays the foundation for the gospel’s subsequent spread to the entire gentile world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SamariaintheMissionoftheEarlyChurch\">Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In the great commission given prior to his ascension, Jesus told his disciples to take the gospel to Samaria (Acts 1:8). The missionary activity of the early church did indeed include this region. When, following the martyrdom of Stephen, many Christians were forced to leave Jerusalem (8:1), one such Christian, Philip, spread the gospel in the city of Samaria (v 5). The response was so great to the miracles performed that Peter and John (representing the apostles in Jerusalem) were sent to investigate and to confirm the presence of the Holy Spirit among them. Evidence from the second century <span>AD<\/span> suggests, however, that Christianity did not gain a strong foothold among the Samaritans. For the most part, the Samaritans retained their own religion. A small remnant of the Samaritan sect continues to exist to this day, living near Mt Gerizim (Shechem) and in various cities in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament); Samaria.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SAMARITANS Schismatic group from the Jews. The group resided north of Judea and south of Galilee in hostile tension with its Jewish neighbors. Jesus’ attitude toward this despised group radically contrasted with contemporary sentiment. Preview • Origins of the Sect • Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews • Samaritan Beliefs • Jesus and the Samaritans • Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church Origins of the Sect It is difficult to determine precisely when the Samaritan sect arose an...","summary_en":"SAMARITANS Schismatic group from the Jews. The group resided north of Judea and south of Galilee in hostile tension with its Jewish neighbors. Jesus’ attitude toward this despised group radically contrasted with contemporary sentiment. Preview • Origins of the Sect • Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews • Samaritan Beliefs • Jesus and the Samaritans • Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church Origins of the Sect It is difficult to determine precisely when the Samaritan sect arose an...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"38":[{"id":42235,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Women Named Mary","title_en":"Women Named Mary","content_ro":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","summary_en":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42376,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","title_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","content_ro":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","summary_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69861,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Women Named Mary","title_en":"Women Named Mary","content_ro":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","summary_en":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70002,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","title_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","content_ro":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","summary_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97487,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Women Named Mary","title_en":"Women Named Mary","content_ro":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","summary_en":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97628,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","title_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","content_ro":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","summary_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125113,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Women Named Mary","title_en":"Women Named Mary","content_ro":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","summary_en":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125254,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","title_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","content_ro":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","summary_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22836,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lazarus","title_en":"Lazarus","content_ro":"<h3>LAZARUS<\/h3>\n<li>1. Lazarus the beggar. In one of Jesus’ most familiar parables (Lk 16:19-31), he contrasted the earthly circumstances of a beggar named Lazarus with that of a nameless rich man. From the adjective for “rich” in the Latin Vulgate, the rich man came to be called in English “Dives.” The rich man relished the luxury of his wealth, while he ignored an ulcerated blind beggar lying at his gate. Jesus said that Lazarus died and went to Abraham’s bosom, while Dives suffered everlasting torment.<\/li>\n<p>The parable of Lazarus has been misinterpreted sometimes as a condemnation of wealth instead of a warning against enjoyment of wealth without regard for the poor. It teaches that decisions in the present life determine eternal destiny.<\/p>\n<p>In no other parable did Jesus identify a character by name. Some Bible students have therefore concluded that he was telling a true story. The name’s symbolism, however, seems to account for its use, since Lazarus was cast in the role of one “whom God helped.” In the Middle Ages the beggar Lazarus was venerated as the patron saint of lepers. Leper hospitals were called lazar-houses.<\/p>\n<li>2. Lazarus of Bethany. Jesus performed the most spectacular of all his miracles (excluding his own resurrection) when he restored Lazarus of Bethany to life four days after death. Lazarus lived with his two sisters, Mary and Martha. They were among Jesus’ most intimate friends (Jn 11:3-5, 36). On several occasions he visited in their home, which also served as his headquarters during his final week on earth (Mt 21:17; Lk 10:38-42; Jn 11:1–12:11). Lazarus was at the banquet in Jesus’ honor when Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with costly ointment (Jn 12:1-3).<\/li>\n<p>The raising of Lazarus, the climax of the signs in John’s Gospel, receives the fullest treatment of Jesus’ miracles. It produced three notable results: (1) many Jews in the vicinity of Jerusalem believed in Jesus (Jn 11:45) and some weeks later escorted him into the city (12:17-18); (2) the Jewish leaders, hardened in their rejection of Jesus, resolved that he must die (11:53); (3) those leaders also plotted Lazarus’s death (12:10-11). The miracle not only showed Jesus’ power over death but set the stage for his own resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAZARUS<\/h3>\n<li>1. Lazarus the beggar. In one of Jesus’ most familiar parables (Lk 16:19-31), he contrasted the earthly circumstances of a beggar named Lazarus with that of a nameless rich man. From the adjective for “rich” in the Latin Vulgate, the rich man came to be called in English “Dives.” The rich man relished the luxury of his wealth, while he ignored an ulcerated blind beggar lying at his gate. Jesus said that Lazarus died and went to Abraham’s bosom, while Dives suffered everlasting torment.<\/li>\n<p>The parable of Lazarus has been misinterpreted sometimes as a condemnation of wealth instead of a warning against enjoyment of wealth without regard for the poor. It teaches that decisions in the present life determine eternal destiny.<\/p>\n<p>In no other parable did Jesus identify a character by name. Some Bible students have therefore concluded that he was telling a true story. The name’s symbolism, however, seems to account for its use, since Lazarus was cast in the role of one “whom God helped.” In the Middle Ages the beggar Lazarus was venerated as the patron saint of lepers. Leper hospitals were called lazar-houses.<\/p>\n<li>2. Lazarus of Bethany. Jesus performed the most spectacular of all his miracles (excluding his own resurrection) when he restored Lazarus of Bethany to life four days after death. Lazarus lived with his two sisters, Mary and Martha. They were among Jesus’ most intimate friends (Jn 11:3-5, 36). On several occasions he visited in their home, which also served as his headquarters during his final week on earth (Mt 21:17; Lk 10:38-42; Jn 11:1–12:11). Lazarus was at the banquet in Jesus’ honor when Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with costly ointment (Jn 12:1-3).<\/li>\n<p>The raising of Lazarus, the climax of the signs in John’s Gospel, receives the fullest treatment of Jesus’ miracles. It produced three notable results: (1) many Jews in the vicinity of Jerusalem believed in Jesus (Jn 11:45) and some weeks later escorted him into the city (12:17-18); (2) the Jewish leaders, hardened in their rejection of Jesus, resolved that he must die (11:53); (3) those leaders also plotted Lazarus’s death (12:10-11). The miracle not only showed Jesus’ power over death but set the stage for his own resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAZARUS 1. Lazarus the beggar. In one of Jesus’ most familiar parables (Lk 16:19-31), he contrasted the earthly circumstances of a beggar named Lazarus with that of a nameless rich man. From the adjective for “rich” in the Latin Vulgate, the rich man came to be called in English “Dives.” The rich man relished the luxury of his wealth, while he ignored an ulcerated blind beggar lying at his gate. Jesus said that Lazarus died and went to Abraham’s bosom, while Dives suffered everlasting torment...","summary_en":"LAZARUS 1. Lazarus the beggar. In one of Jesus’ most familiar parables (Lk 16:19-31), he contrasted the earthly circumstances of a beggar named Lazarus with that of a nameless rich man. From the adjective for “rich” in the Latin Vulgate, the rich man came to be called in English “Dives.” The rich man relished the luxury of his wealth, while he ignored an ulcerated blind beggar lying at his gate. Jesus said that Lazarus died and went to Abraham’s bosom, while Dives suffered everlasting torment...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24584,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mary","title_en":"Mary","content_ro":"<h3>MARY<\/h3>\n<p>Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, then traveled to Bethlehem (Joseph’s hometown) for a census, where Jesus was born (Mt 2:1; Lk 1:5; 2:4-5). Matthew informs us that shortly after the birth the family had to flee to Egypt to escape Herod (Mt 2:13-14). Later, the family resided again in Nazareth (Mt 2:23; Lk 2:39).<\/p>\n<p>We have little other information about Mary. She was certainly a concerned mother (as her scolding of Jesus in Lk 2:48 shows), and she later had a high estimate of Jesus’ ability (as at the wedding in Cana, Jn 2:1-4). She had several other sons and daughters to care for. She appeared at the foot of the cross, where Jesus asked “the beloved disciple” to care for her in her grief (Jn 19:25-27). After the resurrection she and Jesus’ brothers were among the disciples who experienced the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost (Acts 1:14). No further mention is made of her.<\/p>\n<p>Mary’s song of praise, “The Magnificat” (Lk 1:46-55) displays her sterling humility and trust in God’s will. She is truly “blessed among women” (v 42).<\/p>\n<li>2. Mary, the mother of James and Joseph. This woman goes by several names, but in each account she appears among Jesus’ faithful female disciples, standing by the cross and witnessing the empty tomb. Matthew calls her “Mary the mother of James and Joseph” or just “the other Mary” (27:56, 61; 28:1); Mark names her “Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses,” “Mary the mother of Joses,” or “Mary the mother of James” (15:40, 47; 16:1); in John’s Gospel, she is “Mary wife of Clopas” (19:25), though she may possibly be a separate Mary. Tradition has it that this Mary was Jesus’ aunt, as Clopas was Joseph’s brother (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.11).<\/li>\n<li>3. Mary Magdalene. We know little about this woman other than that her name indicates that she was from Magdala in Galilee. Somewhere in Galilee she met Jesus, who cast seven demons out of her. She then joined the band of disciples and followed Jesus wherever he went (Lk 8:2), ending up in Jerusalem at the foot of the cross when all the male disciples had fled (Mk 15:40; Jn 19:25). She observed Jesus’ burial (Mk 15:47) and witnessed the events surrounding the resurrection. Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1, and Luke 24:10 group her with the other women who went to the tomb. John says that she was the first among these women to discover the empty tomb, the first to report to the disciples, and the first to see the risen Christ as she lingered by the tomb after all the others had left (Jn 20:1-2, 11-18). This faithful disciple, however, was not allowed to touch her Lord (v 17).<\/li>\n<li>4. Mary of Bethany. This Judean Mary was the sister of Martha and Lazarus. We know three facts about her. First, she was such a devoted follower of Jesus that she neglected her household duties to listen to him (Lk 10:38-42; Jesus approved this). Second, she was apparently upset with Jesus when he did not come to heal her brother before he died (Jn 11:20, 28-33). Finally, before Jesus died, she anointed him with an expensive ointment while he feasted at her home in Bethany (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9; Jn 12:1-8).<\/li>\n<li>5. Mary, mother of John Mark. This woman appears only once in Scripture (Acts 12:12). Her house was the meeting place of the persecuted church. Since it was apparently large and she had servants, she was a wealthy woman, probably a widow (since no husband is mentioned). In her house the church prayed for Peter, and Peter came there after being released from prison. Her son John Mark accompanied Paul and probably Peter as well.<\/li>\n<li>6. Mary of Rome. In Romans 16:6 Paul greets a woman in Rome named simply “Mary, who has worked hard among you.” At some time she had been in Greece or Asia Minor, perhaps being expelled from Rome with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2; c. <span>AD<\/span> 49). While there she had met Paul, perhaps being converted by him, and had worked hard with him in his work of evangelism or caring for the church. By <span>AD<\/span> 56 (a probable date for the book of Romans), she had returned to Rome. She was distinguished by the praise Paul heaped upon her and his other coworkers living in Rome.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>MARY<\/h3>\n<p>Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, then traveled to Bethlehem (Joseph’s hometown) for a census, where Jesus was born (Mt 2:1; Lk 1:5; 2:4-5). Matthew informs us that shortly after the birth the family had to flee to Egypt to escape Herod (Mt 2:13-14). Later, the family resided again in Nazareth (Mt 2:23; Lk 2:39).<\/p>\n<p>We have little other information about Mary. She was certainly a concerned mother (as her scolding of Jesus in Lk 2:48 shows), and she later had a high estimate of Jesus’ ability (as at the wedding in Cana, Jn 2:1-4). She had several other sons and daughters to care for. She appeared at the foot of the cross, where Jesus asked “the beloved disciple” to care for her in her grief (Jn 19:25-27). After the resurrection she and Jesus’ brothers were among the disciples who experienced the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost (Acts 1:14). No further mention is made of her.<\/p>\n<p>Mary’s song of praise, “The Magnificat” (Lk 1:46-55) displays her sterling humility and trust in God’s will. She is truly “blessed among women” (v 42).<\/p>\n<li>2. Mary, the mother of James and Joseph. This woman goes by several names, but in each account she appears among Jesus’ faithful female disciples, standing by the cross and witnessing the empty tomb. Matthew calls her “Mary the mother of James and Joseph” or just “the other Mary” (27:56, 61; 28:1); Mark names her “Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses,” “Mary the mother of Joses,” or “Mary the mother of James” (15:40, 47; 16:1); in John’s Gospel, she is “Mary wife of Clopas” (19:25), though she may possibly be a separate Mary. Tradition has it that this Mary was Jesus’ aunt, as Clopas was Joseph’s brother (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.11).<\/li>\n<li>3. Mary Magdalene. We know little about this woman other than that her name indicates that she was from Magdala in Galilee. Somewhere in Galilee she met Jesus, who cast seven demons out of her. She then joined the band of disciples and followed Jesus wherever he went (Lk 8:2), ending up in Jerusalem at the foot of the cross when all the male disciples had fled (Mk 15:40; Jn 19:25). She observed Jesus’ burial (Mk 15:47) and witnessed the events surrounding the resurrection. Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1, and Luke 24:10 group her with the other women who went to the tomb. John says that she was the first among these women to discover the empty tomb, the first to report to the disciples, and the first to see the risen Christ as she lingered by the tomb after all the others had left (Jn 20:1-2, 11-18). This faithful disciple, however, was not allowed to touch her Lord (v 17).<\/li>\n<li>4. Mary of Bethany. This Judean Mary was the sister of Martha and Lazarus. We know three facts about her. First, she was such a devoted follower of Jesus that she neglected her household duties to listen to him (Lk 10:38-42; Jesus approved this). Second, she was apparently upset with Jesus when he did not come to heal her brother before he died (Jn 11:20, 28-33). Finally, before Jesus died, she anointed him with an expensive ointment while he feasted at her home in Bethany (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9; Jn 12:1-8).<\/li>\n<li>5. Mary, mother of John Mark. This woman appears only once in Scripture (Acts 12:12). Her house was the meeting place of the persecuted church. Since it was apparently large and she had servants, she was a wealthy woman, probably a widow (since no husband is mentioned). In her house the church prayed for Peter, and Peter came there after being released from prison. Her son John Mark accompanied Paul and probably Peter as well.<\/li>\n<li>6. Mary of Rome. In Romans 16:6 Paul greets a woman in Rome named simply “Mary, who has worked hard among you.” At some time she had been in Greece or Asia Minor, perhaps being expelled from Rome with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2; c. <span>AD<\/span> 49). While there she had met Paul, perhaps being converted by him, and had worked hard with him in his work of evangelism or caring for the church. By <span>AD<\/span> 56 (a probable date for the book of Romans), she had returned to Rome. She was distinguished by the praise Paul heaped upon her and his other coworkers living in Rome.<\/li>","summary_ro":"MARY Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT. 1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, the...","summary_en":"MARY Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT. 1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, the...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24893,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Significance of Meals","title_en":"Significance of Meals","content_ro":"<h3>MEALS, Significance of<\/h3>\n<p>The meal played a significant role in family, social, and religious life. The evening meal was the time when all family members normally were gathered together, and was thus an important time of fellowship. Providing food for the traveler was both a social and a religious responsibility, while the ideal of a quiet social life was realized by having friends break bread with the family and discuss the problems of the day by the light of small oil lamps. The significance of the meal retains its central focus both in the Jewish religion with the Passover meal and in Christianity with the celebration of the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East two meals were normally eaten during the day. The first was the noonday meal, usually consumed by laborers in the field and consisting of such items as small cakes or flat loaves, figs or olives, and possibly cheese or curds of goats’ milk. This was considered a small meal, eaten for sustenance and refreshment at a time of relaxation and respite from the heat of the sun and the labor of the day (Ru 2:14). Breakfast was considered unnecessary, and biblical references to any such form of early morning meal are very few (Jgs 19:5; Jn 21:12).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in Egypt the main meal was served at noon, among the Hebrews the evening meal was the most important social occasion of the day. Then the exhausted field workers could return home to relax after their day’s work and enjoy the feeling of communal warmth as the family gathered together for their principal meal. This occasion coincided with the arrival of darkness, a time when there was insufficient light for fieldwork to continue.<\/p>\n<p>The laborer’s meal consisted of bread or cakes made of hand-ground grain, goats’ cheese or curds, vegetables (especially beans, lentils, leeks, and peas, which were popular for the sake of variety although not always plentiful), and figs, olives, raisins, and dates. Meat was usually available, but for the majority was a luxury item. Food was cooked in olive oil, and honey was used for sweetening.<\/p>\n<p>The meal was eaten together by the entire family. There was no separate dining room in the average house, and during the patriarchal period, meals were consumed while the family was seated on the floor, a mat often serving as a table (Gn 37:25). Canaanite seating habits were adopted subsequently, and chairs and small tables were used (1 Kgs 13:20; Ps 23:5; Ez 23:41). Eating in the Egyptian fashion in a reclining position became popular and continued throughout the Roman period. Musical entertainment, dancing, and riddles were sometimes provided on festive occasions for family and guests, since the meal period was the normal time for entertainment in Near Eastern society.<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, a separate upper room often served as a dining room. Guests reclined by leaning on the left elbow so that they were close enough together on their couches to facilitate easy conversation. There was a strict hierarchy to the seating arrangements (cf. Gn 43:33; 1 Sm 9:22; Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 14:8) at all formal meals, the “highest” place being that to the right of the servants as they entered the room and the lowest to their left.<\/p>\n<p>Guests washed their hands before and after meals, and normally partook of a form of meat and\/or vegetable stew from a common bowl placed in the center of the table. Instead of cutlery, pieces of bread held in the fingers were made into the shape of a small scoop and dipped into the bowl. There would usually be only one main dish requiring preparation, so that the woman who had cooked the meal could partake of it with her guests, thus fulfilling the ideals of community at mealtimes.<\/p>\n<p>On several occasions in the NT Jesus is mentioned as eating meals with disciples and friends. He and his followers were guests at the wedding feast held in Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-10), and also at a dinner given by Matthew (Mt 9:10), as well as at another given by Simon the Pharisee (Lk 7:36-50). Jesus also was entertained at dinner somewhat unexpectedly by Zacchaeus (19:6-7). On several occasions Jesus was a guest at a family gathering held at the home of Martha, Mary, and Lazarus in Bethany (Lk 10:38-42; Jn 12:2). Following the customs of smaller towns and villages, passersby may well have called into the house to greet Jesus and perhaps converse with other guests.<\/p>\n<p>There are two important meals described in Scripture, one involving the old covenant and the other the new, in which meals had a redemptive meaning for the people of God. The first was the institution of the Passover at the time of Israel’s departure from Egypt under Moses (Ex 12). The second was the institution of the Lord’s Supper. Both are discussed in detail in separate articles.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Lord’s Supper, The; Passover.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MEALS, Significance of<\/h3>\n<p>The meal played a significant role in family, social, and religious life. The evening meal was the time when all family members normally were gathered together, and was thus an important time of fellowship. Providing food for the traveler was both a social and a religious responsibility, while the ideal of a quiet social life was realized by having friends break bread with the family and discuss the problems of the day by the light of small oil lamps. The significance of the meal retains its central focus both in the Jewish religion with the Passover meal and in Christianity with the celebration of the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East two meals were normally eaten during the day. The first was the noonday meal, usually consumed by laborers in the field and consisting of such items as small cakes or flat loaves, figs or olives, and possibly cheese or curds of goats’ milk. This was considered a small meal, eaten for sustenance and refreshment at a time of relaxation and respite from the heat of the sun and the labor of the day (Ru 2:14). Breakfast was considered unnecessary, and biblical references to any such form of early morning meal are very few (Jgs 19:5; Jn 21:12).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in Egypt the main meal was served at noon, among the Hebrews the evening meal was the most important social occasion of the day. Then the exhausted field workers could return home to relax after their day’s work and enjoy the feeling of communal warmth as the family gathered together for their principal meal. This occasion coincided with the arrival of darkness, a time when there was insufficient light for fieldwork to continue.<\/p>\n<p>The laborer’s meal consisted of bread or cakes made of hand-ground grain, goats’ cheese or curds, vegetables (especially beans, lentils, leeks, and peas, which were popular for the sake of variety although not always plentiful), and figs, olives, raisins, and dates. Meat was usually available, but for the majority was a luxury item. Food was cooked in olive oil, and honey was used for sweetening.<\/p>\n<p>The meal was eaten together by the entire family. There was no separate dining room in the average house, and during the patriarchal period, meals were consumed while the family was seated on the floor, a mat often serving as a table (Gn 37:25). Canaanite seating habits were adopted subsequently, and chairs and small tables were used (1 Kgs 13:20; Ps 23:5; Ez 23:41). Eating in the Egyptian fashion in a reclining position became popular and continued throughout the Roman period. Musical entertainment, dancing, and riddles were sometimes provided on festive occasions for family and guests, since the meal period was the normal time for entertainment in Near Eastern society.<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, a separate upper room often served as a dining room. Guests reclined by leaning on the left elbow so that they were close enough together on their couches to facilitate easy conversation. There was a strict hierarchy to the seating arrangements (cf. Gn 43:33; 1 Sm 9:22; Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 14:8) at all formal meals, the “highest” place being that to the right of the servants as they entered the room and the lowest to their left.<\/p>\n<p>Guests washed their hands before and after meals, and normally partook of a form of meat and\/or vegetable stew from a common bowl placed in the center of the table. Instead of cutlery, pieces of bread held in the fingers were made into the shape of a small scoop and dipped into the bowl. There would usually be only one main dish requiring preparation, so that the woman who had cooked the meal could partake of it with her guests, thus fulfilling the ideals of community at mealtimes.<\/p>\n<p>On several occasions in the NT Jesus is mentioned as eating meals with disciples and friends. He and his followers were guests at the wedding feast held in Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-10), and also at a dinner given by Matthew (Mt 9:10), as well as at another given by Simon the Pharisee (Lk 7:36-50). Jesus also was entertained at dinner somewhat unexpectedly by Zacchaeus (19:6-7). On several occasions Jesus was a guest at a family gathering held at the home of Martha, Mary, and Lazarus in Bethany (Lk 10:38-42; Jn 12:2). Following the customs of smaller towns and villages, passersby may well have called into the house to greet Jesus and perhaps converse with other guests.<\/p>\n<p>There are two important meals described in Scripture, one involving the old covenant and the other the new, in which meals had a redemptive meaning for the people of God. The first was the institution of the Passover at the time of Israel’s departure from Egypt under Moses (Ex 12). The second was the institution of the Lord’s Supper. Both are discussed in detail in separate articles.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Lord’s Supper, The; Passover.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MEALS, Significance of The meal played a significant role in family, social, and religious life. The evening meal was the time when all family members normally were gathered together, and was thus an important time of fellowship. Providing food for the traveler was both a social and a religious responsibility, while the ideal of a quiet social life was realized by having friends break bread with the family and discuss the problems of the day by the light of small oil lamps. The significance o...","summary_en":"MEALS, Significance of The meal played a significant role in family, social, and religious life. The evening meal was the time when all family members normally were gathered together, and was thus an important time of fellowship. Providing food for the traveler was both a social and a religious responsibility, while the ideal of a quiet social life was realized by having friends break bread with the family and discuss the problems of the day by the light of small oil lamps. The significance o...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28430,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mount of Olives","title_en":"Mount of Olives","content_ro":"<h3>OLIVES, Mount of<\/h3>\n<p>Prominent ridge running north-south in the Judean mountains, lying due east of Jerusalem and the Kidron Valley. Three summits with two intervening valleys distinguish the mountain. The northern summit is Mt Scopus. To its south is a small saddle through which the ancient Roman road to Jericho passed. The central hill is the traditional Mt of Olives (2,684 feet, or 818.1 meters) standing across from the temple platform (the <em>Haram esh-Sherif<\/em>). Here Constantine built the great Church of the Ascension dedicated to his mother, Helena. Another saddle to the south contains the modern road to Bethany. The southern hill, overlooking Jebusite Jerusalem and the city of David, is called the “Mt of Offense” since here Solomon built temples for his foreign wives. Beneath it is the Arab village of Silwan and the confluence of the Kidron and Hinnom valleys.<\/p>\n\n<p>The Mt of Olives gained its name from its extensive olive groves, which were renowned in antiquity (Zec 14:4; Mk 11:1). Its western face collects rainfall from the Mediterranean, which, together with decomposed limestone, makes for fertile orchards. The eastern side marks the boundary of the arid Judean wilderness. Bethany and Bethphage are two NT villages hugging these eastern slopes.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the Mt of Olives is first mentioned when David fled from Absalom’s conspiracy. He departed from Jerusalem, went up the Mt of Olives in the east, and continued on toward the Rift Valley (2 Sm 15:30). Solomon chose this mountain for the construction of “high places” for the foreign deities of Sidon, Moab (1 Kgs 11:7), and Ammon—each of which was later destroyed by Josiah (2 Kgs 23:13). Ezekiel (Ez 11:23) records the vision of the glory of God departing from the temple and resting on the Mt of Olives. The most famous description appears in Zechariah’s apocalyptic vision (Zec 14:1-5): “On that day [the <span>Lord<\/span>’s] feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which faces Jerusalem on the east. And the Mount of Olives will split apart, making a wide valley running from east to west, for half the mountain will move toward the north and half toward the south” (v 4, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT Jesus appears at the Mt of Olives during Passion week. The only exceptions are the Bethany stories when Jesus visits Mary and Martha (Lk 10:38-42) and raises Lazarus from the dead (Jn 11:17-44). On his triumphant entry to Jerusalem, Jesus came from Jericho, crossed the mountain from the east, and then descended into the Kidron Valley (Mk 11:1-10). On his descent he paused and wept over the city (Lk 19:41-44).<\/p>\n<p>During his final week, Jesus taught on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13) and spent his evenings there (Lk 21:37, although this may refer to Bethany). Following the Last Supper, Jesus came to this mountain for prayer (Mk 14:26). In a garden near an olive oil press (“Gethsemane”), he was arrested (v 32). The final event of Christ on earth, his ascension, was viewed from the mount by his followers (Acts 1:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OLIVES, Mount of<\/h3>\n<p>Prominent ridge running north-south in the Judean mountains, lying due east of Jerusalem and the Kidron Valley. Three summits with two intervening valleys distinguish the mountain. The northern summit is Mt Scopus. To its south is a small saddle through which the ancient Roman road to Jericho passed. The central hill is the traditional Mt of Olives (2,684 feet, or 818.1 meters) standing across from the temple platform (the <em>Haram esh-Sherif<\/em>). Here Constantine built the great Church of the Ascension dedicated to his mother, Helena. Another saddle to the south contains the modern road to Bethany. The southern hill, overlooking Jebusite Jerusalem and the city of David, is called the “Mt of Offense” since here Solomon built temples for his foreign wives. Beneath it is the Arab village of Silwan and the confluence of the Kidron and Hinnom valleys.<\/p>\n\n<p>The Mt of Olives gained its name from its extensive olive groves, which were renowned in antiquity (Zec 14:4; Mk 11:1). Its western face collects rainfall from the Mediterranean, which, together with decomposed limestone, makes for fertile orchards. The eastern side marks the boundary of the arid Judean wilderness. Bethany and Bethphage are two NT villages hugging these eastern slopes.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the Mt of Olives is first mentioned when David fled from Absalom’s conspiracy. He departed from Jerusalem, went up the Mt of Olives in the east, and continued on toward the Rift Valley (2 Sm 15:30). Solomon chose this mountain for the construction of “high places” for the foreign deities of Sidon, Moab (1 Kgs 11:7), and Ammon—each of which was later destroyed by Josiah (2 Kgs 23:13). Ezekiel (Ez 11:23) records the vision of the glory of God departing from the temple and resting on the Mt of Olives. The most famous description appears in Zechariah’s apocalyptic vision (Zec 14:1-5): “On that day [the <span>Lord<\/span>’s] feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which faces Jerusalem on the east. And the Mount of Olives will split apart, making a wide valley running from east to west, for half the mountain will move toward the north and half toward the south” (v 4, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT Jesus appears at the Mt of Olives during Passion week. The only exceptions are the Bethany stories when Jesus visits Mary and Martha (Lk 10:38-42) and raises Lazarus from the dead (Jn 11:17-44). On his triumphant entry to Jerusalem, Jesus came from Jericho, crossed the mountain from the east, and then descended into the Kidron Valley (Mk 11:1-10). On his descent he paused and wept over the city (Lk 19:41-44).<\/p>\n<p>During his final week, Jesus taught on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13) and spent his evenings there (Lk 21:37, although this may refer to Bethany). Following the Last Supper, Jesus came to this mountain for prayer (Mk 14:26). In a garden near an olive oil press (“Gethsemane”), he was arrested (v 32). The final event of Christ on earth, his ascension, was viewed from the mount by his followers (Acts 1:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"OLIVES, Mount of Prominent ridge running north-south in the Judean mountains, lying due east of Jerusalem and the Kidron Valley. Three summits with two intervening valleys distinguish the mountain. The northern summit is Mt Scopus. To its south is a small saddle through which the ancient Roman road to Jericho passed. The central hill is the traditional Mt of Olives (2,684 feet, or 818.1 meters) standing across from the temple platform (the Haram esh-Sherif). Here Constantine built the great C...","summary_en":"OLIVES, Mount of Prominent ridge running north-south in the Judean mountains, lying due east of Jerusalem and the Kidron Valley. Three summits with two intervening valleys distinguish the mountain. The northern summit is Mt Scopus. To its south is a small saddle through which the ancient Roman road to Jericho passed. The central hill is the traditional Mt of Olives (2,684 feet, or 818.1 meters) standing across from the temple platform (the Haram esh-Sherif). Here Constantine built the great C...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55899,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:38","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:38-42<\/strong> <em>Martha<\/em><em> . . .<\/em><em>Mary<\/em> and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:38-42<\/strong> <em>Martha<\/em><em> . . .<\/em><em>Mary<\/em> and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:38-42 Martha . . .Mary and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).","summary_en":"10:38-42 Martha . . .Mary and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83525,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:38","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:38-42<\/strong> <em>Martha<\/em><em> . . .<\/em><em>Mary<\/em> and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:38-42<\/strong> <em>Martha<\/em><em> . . .<\/em><em>Mary<\/em> and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:38-42 Martha . . .Mary and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).","summary_en":"10:38-42 Martha . . .Mary and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111151,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:38","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:38-42<\/strong> <em>Martha<\/em><em> . . .<\/em><em>Mary<\/em> and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:38-42<\/strong> <em>Martha<\/em><em> . . .<\/em><em>Mary<\/em> and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:38-42 Martha . . .Mary and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).","summary_en":"10:38-42 Martha . . .Mary and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138777,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:38","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:38-42<\/strong> <em>Martha<\/em><em> . . .<\/em><em>Mary<\/em> and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:38-42<\/strong> <em>Martha<\/em><em> . . .<\/em><em>Mary<\/em> and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:38-42 Martha . . .Mary and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).","summary_en":"10:38-42 Martha . . .Mary and their brother Lazarus were good friends of Jesus who lived in Bethany, east of Jerusalem (see John 11:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65536,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93162,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120788,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148414,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"39":[{"id":55900,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:39","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:39<\/strong> <em>Mary<\/em> . . . <em>sat at the Lord’s feet<\/em> in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:39<\/strong> <em>Mary<\/em> . . . <em>sat at the Lord’s feet<\/em> in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:39 Mary . . . sat at the Lord’s feet in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.","summary_en":"10:39 Mary . . . sat at the Lord’s feet in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83526,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:39","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:39<\/strong> <em>Mary<\/em> . . . <em>sat at the Lord’s feet<\/em> in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:39<\/strong> <em>Mary<\/em> . . . <em>sat at the Lord’s feet<\/em> in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:39 Mary . . . sat at the Lord’s feet in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.","summary_en":"10:39 Mary . . . sat at the Lord’s feet in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111152,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:39","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:39<\/strong> <em>Mary<\/em> . . . <em>sat at the Lord’s feet<\/em> in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:39<\/strong> <em>Mary<\/em> . . . <em>sat at the Lord’s feet<\/em> in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:39 Mary . . . sat at the Lord’s feet in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.","summary_en":"10:39 Mary . . . sat at the Lord’s feet in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138778,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:39","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:39<\/strong> <em>Mary<\/em> . . . <em>sat at the Lord’s feet<\/em> in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:39<\/strong> <em>Mary<\/em> . . . <em>sat at the Lord’s feet<\/em> in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:39 Mary . . . sat at the Lord’s feet in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.","summary_en":"10:39 Mary . . . sat at the Lord’s feet in the position of a disciple (cp. Acts 22:3). Rabbis did not usually have female disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"40":[{"id":55901,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:40","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> <em>Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing:<\/em> Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> <em>Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing:<\/em> Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:40 Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing: Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.","summary_en":"10:40 Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing: Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83527,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:40","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> <em>Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing:<\/em> Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> <em>Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing:<\/em> Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:40 Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing: Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.","summary_en":"10:40 Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing: Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111153,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:40","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> <em>Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing:<\/em> Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> <em>Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing:<\/em> Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:40 Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing: Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.","summary_en":"10:40 Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing: Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138779,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:40","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> <em>Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing:<\/em> Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> <em>Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing:<\/em> Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:40 Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing: Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.","summary_en":"10:40 Martha was distracted by the big dinner she was preparing: Hospitality was valued highly, and Martha was fulfilling the expected role of a woman. She was frustrated that Mary was not.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"41":[{"id":24554,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Martha","title_en":"Martha","content_ro":"<h3>MARTHA<\/h3>\n<p>Sister of Mary and Lazarus, and friend of Jesus. Martha’s family lived in Bethany, a small town on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives.<\/p>\n<p>Luke gives an account of an incident concerning Martha when she was busy preparing and serving food while her sister, Mary, was listening to Jesus. Martha complained to Jesus that Mary was not helping her; Jesus corrected Martha gently: “My dear Martha, you are so upset over all these details! There is really only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it—and I won’t take it away from her” (Lk 10:41-42, <span>nlt<\/span>). In saying this, Jesus challenged Martha’s anxiousness by pointing out that fellowship with him was life’s highest and most rewarding priority.<\/p>\n<p>In John’s account of the death and resurrection of Lazarus, it is Martha who, upon Jesus’ arrival, goes out to meet him while Mary remains in the house (Jn 11:20). Once again, Martha complains to Jesus, this time saying that if he had come earlier Lazarus would not have died (v 21). When Jesus replied that her brother would rise again, Martha naturally assumed that Jesus was speaking of the future resurrection. Jesus reassured Martha that he was the resurrection and the life and that she must trust in him (vv 23-26). Martha then confessed her belief that Jesus was the Christ (v 27). When Jesus asked that the tomb be opened, Martha protested that the smell would be unpleasant. Jesus replied firmly to her doubts, “Did I not tell you that if you would believe you would see the glory of God?” (v 40, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus then proceeded to raise Lazarus from the dead.<\/p>\n<p>In John 12:1-11 Martha is again serving a meal for Jesus and Lazarus; this time she does not protest Mary’s elaborate show of affection for Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARTHA<\/h3>\n<p>Sister of Mary and Lazarus, and friend of Jesus. Martha’s family lived in Bethany, a small town on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives.<\/p>\n<p>Luke gives an account of an incident concerning Martha when she was busy preparing and serving food while her sister, Mary, was listening to Jesus. Martha complained to Jesus that Mary was not helping her; Jesus corrected Martha gently: “My dear Martha, you are so upset over all these details! There is really only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it—and I won’t take it away from her” (Lk 10:41-42, <span>nlt<\/span>). In saying this, Jesus challenged Martha’s anxiousness by pointing out that fellowship with him was life’s highest and most rewarding priority.<\/p>\n<p>In John’s account of the death and resurrection of Lazarus, it is Martha who, upon Jesus’ arrival, goes out to meet him while Mary remains in the house (Jn 11:20). Once again, Martha complains to Jesus, this time saying that if he had come earlier Lazarus would not have died (v 21). When Jesus replied that her brother would rise again, Martha naturally assumed that Jesus was speaking of the future resurrection. Jesus reassured Martha that he was the resurrection and the life and that she must trust in him (vv 23-26). Martha then confessed her belief that Jesus was the Christ (v 27). When Jesus asked that the tomb be opened, Martha protested that the smell would be unpleasant. Jesus replied firmly to her doubts, “Did I not tell you that if you would believe you would see the glory of God?” (v 40, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus then proceeded to raise Lazarus from the dead.<\/p>\n<p>In John 12:1-11 Martha is again serving a meal for Jesus and Lazarus; this time she does not protest Mary’s elaborate show of affection for Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARTHA Sister of Mary and Lazarus, and friend of Jesus. Martha’s family lived in Bethany, a small town on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives. Luke gives an account of an incident concerning Martha when she was busy preparing and serving food while her sister, Mary, was listening to Jesus. Martha complained to Jesus that Mary was not helping her; Jesus corrected Martha gently: “My dear Martha, you are so upset over all these details! There is really only one thing worth being concerned abou...","summary_en":"MARTHA Sister of Mary and Lazarus, and friend of Jesus. Martha’s family lived in Bethany, a small town on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives. Luke gives an account of an incident concerning Martha when she was busy preparing and serving food while her sister, Mary, was listening to Jesus. Martha complained to Jesus that Mary was not helping her; Jesus corrected Martha gently: “My dear Martha, you are so upset over all these details! There is really only one thing worth being concerned abou...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"42":[{"id":55902,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:42","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:42","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:42<\/strong> <em>There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it:<\/em> Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:42<\/strong> <em>There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it:<\/em> Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:42 There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it: Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.","summary_en":"10:42 There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it: Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83528,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:42","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:42","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:42<\/strong> <em>There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it:<\/em> Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:42<\/strong> <em>There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it:<\/em> Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:42 There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it: Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.","summary_en":"10:42 There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it: Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111154,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:42","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:42","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:42<\/strong> <em>There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it:<\/em> Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:42<\/strong> <em>There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it:<\/em> Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:42 There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it: Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.","summary_en":"10:42 There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it: Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138780,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 10:42","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 10:42","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:42<\/strong> <em>There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it:<\/em> Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:42<\/strong> <em>There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it:<\/em> Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:42 There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it: Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.","summary_en":"10:42 There is only one thing worth being concerned about. Mary has discovered it: Jesus’ words were shocking. Women were expected to serve domestically and were forbidden to learn as disciples from a rabbi. Jesus validated Mary’s desire to be his disciple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Luca 10
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse
Muzică de relaxareSelectează o piesă
0:00
Redare audio
0 piese
🍪 Folosim cookie-uri
Folosim cookie-uri esențiale pentru funcționarea platformei și cookie-uri de analiză pentru a îmbunătăți experiența ta.
Află mai multe
✝️
Logosasistentul Biserica Online
✝️
Bine ai venit! 👋
Sunt Logos, prietenul tău spiritual. Începe conversația — te ascult cu drag! ✨