2
Preoţii cei mai de seamă şi cărturarii căutau un mijloc cum să omoare pe Isus; căci se temeau de norod.
3
Dar Satana a intrat în Iuda, zis şi Iscarioteanul, care era din numărul celor doisprezece.
4
Iuda s-a dus să se înţeleagă cu preoţii cei mai de seamă şi cu căpeteniile străjerilor Templului cum să -L dea în mânile lor.
5
Ei s-au bucurat, şi au căzut la învoială să-i dea bani.
6
După ce le-a făgăduit că li -L va da în mâni, Iuda căuta un prilej nimerit să dea pe Isus în mânile lor, fără ştirea norodului.
7
Ziua praznicului Azimilor, în care trebuiau jertfite Paştele, a venit.
8
Şi Isus a trimes pe Petru şi pe Ioan, şi le-a zis: ,,Duceţi-vă de pregătiţi-ne Paştele, ca să mâncăm.``
9
,,Unde voieşti să pregătim?`` L-au întrebat ei.
10
El le-a răspuns: ,,Iată, când veţi intra în cetate, vă va ieşi înainte un om, ducând un ulcior cu apă; mergeţi după el în casa în care va intra,
11
şi spuneţi stăpânului casei: ,Învăţătorul îţi zice: Unde este odaia pentru oaspeţi, în care să mănânc Paştele cu ucenicii Mei?`
12
Şi are să vă arate o odae mare de sus, aşternută gata: acolo să pregătiţi Paştele.``
13
Ei au plecat, şi au găsit aşa cum le spusese El. Şi au pregătit Paştele.
14
Când a sosit ceasul, Isus a şezut la masă cu cei doisprezece apostoli.
15
El le-a zis: ,,Am dorit mult să mănânc Paştele acestea cu voi înainte de patima Mea;
16
căci vă spun, că de acum încolo, nu le voi mai mânca, până la împlinirea lor în Împărăţia lui Dumnezeu.``
17
Şi a luat un pahar, a mulţămit lui Dumnezeu, şi a zis: ,,Luaţi paharul acesta, şi împărţiţi-l între voi;
18
pentrucă vă spun că nu voi mai bea de acum încolo din rodul viţei, pănă când va veni Împărăţia lui Dumnezeu.``
19
Apoi a luat pâne; şi, după ce a mulţămit lui Dumnezeu, a frânt-o, şi le-a dat-o zicând: ,,Acesta este trupul Meu, care se dă pentru voi; să faceţi lucrul acesta spre pomenirea Mea.``
20
Tot astfel, dupăce au mâncat, a luat paharul, şi li l-a dat, zicând: ,,Acest pahar este legământul cel nou, făcut în sângele Meu, care se varsă pentru voi.``
21
,,Dar iată că mâna vânzătorului Meu este cu Mine la masa aceasta.
22
Negreşit, Fiul omului Se duce, după cum este rânduit. Dar vai de omul acela prin care este vândut El!``
23
Şi au început să se întrebe unii pe alţii cine din ei să fie acela care va face lucrul acesta.
24
Între apostoli s-a iscat şi o ceartă, ca să ştie care din ei avea să fie socotit ca cel mai mare?
25
Isus le-a zis: ,,Împăraţii Neamurilor domnesc peste ele; şi celorce le stăpânesc, li se dă numele de binefăcători.
26
Voi să nu fiţi aşa. Ci cel mai mare dintre voi, să fie ca cel mai mic; şi celce cârmuieşte, ca celce slujeşte.
27
Căci care este mai mare: cine stă la masă, sau cine slujeşte la masă? Nu cine stă la masă? Şi Eu totuş, sânt în mijlocul vostru ca celce slujeşte la masă.
28
Voi sânteţi aceia, cari aţi rămas necontenit cu Mine în încercările Mele.
29
De aceea vă pregătesc Împărăţia, după cum Tatăl Meu Mi-a pregătit-o Mie,
30
ca să mâncaţi şi să beţi la masa Mea în Împărăţia Mea, şi să şedeţi pe scaune de domnie, ca să judecaţi pe cele douăsprezece seminţii ale lui Israel.``
31
Domnul a zis: ,,Simone, Simone, Satana v-a cerut să vă cearnă ca grâul.
32
Dar Eu M-am rugat pentru tine, ca să nu se piardă credinţa ta; şi dupăce te vei întoarce la Dumnezeu, să întăreşti pe fraţii tăi.``
33
,,Doamne``, I-a zis Petru, ,,cu Tine sânt gata să merg chiar şi în temniţă şi la moarte.``
34
Şi Isus i-a zis: ,,Petre, îţi spun că nu va cânta astăzi cocoşul, până te vei lepăda de trei ori că nu Mă cunoşti.``
35
Apoi le-a mai zis: ,,Când v-am trimes fără pungă, fără traistă, şi fără încălţăminte, aţi dus voi lipsă de ceva? ,,De nimic``, I-au răspuns ei.
36
Şi El le-a zis: ,,Acum, dimpotrivă, cine are o pungă, s-o ia; cine are o traistă, deasemenea s-o ia; şi cine n-are sabie, să-şi vândă haina, şi să-şi cumpere o sabie.
37
Căci vă spun că trebuie să se împlinească cu Mine aceste cuvinte scrise: ,El a fost pus în numărul celor fărădelege.` Şi lucrurile privitoare la Mine, sânt gata să se împlinească.``
38
,,Doamne``, I-au zis ei, ,,iată aici două săbii.`` Şi El le-a zis: ,,Destul!``
39
După ce a ieşit afară, S-a dus, ca de obicei, în muntele Măslinilor. Ucenicii Lui au mers după El.
40
Când a ajuns la locul acela, le-a zis: ,,Rugaţi-vă, ca să nu cădeţi în ispită.``
41
Apoi S-a depărtat de ei ca la o aruncătură de piatră, a îngenuncheat, şi a început să Se roage,
42
zicând: ,,Tată, dacă voieşti, depărtează paharul acesta dela Mine! Totuş, facă-se nu voia Mea, ci a Ta.``
43
Atunci I s-a arătat un înger din cer, ca să -L întărească.
44
A ajuns într-un chin ca de moarte, şi a început să Se roage şi mai fierbinte; şi sudoarea I se făcuse ca nişte picături mari de sânge, cari cădeau pe pământ.
45
După ce S-a rugat, S-a sculat, şi a venit la ucenici; i-a găsit adormiţi de întristare,
46
şi le-a zis: ,,Pentruce dormiţi? Sculaţi-vă şi rugaţi-vă, ca să nu cădeţi în ispită.``
47
Pe când grăia El încă, iată că a venit o gloată. Şi cel ce se chema Iuda, unul din cei doisprezece, mergea în fruntea lor. El s-a apropiat de Isus, ca să -L sărute.
48
Şi Isus i-a zis: ,,Iudo, cu o sărutare vinzi tu pe Fiul omului?``
49
Ceice erau cu Isus, au văzut ce avea să se întâmple, şi au zis: ,,Doamne, să lovim cu sabia?``
50
Şi unul din ei a lovit pe robul marelui preot, şi i-a tăiat urechea dreaptă.
51
Dar Isus a luat cuvântul, şi a zis: ,,Lăsaţi-i! Până aici!`` Şi S-a atins de urechea omului aceluia, şi l-a vindecat.
52
Isus a zis apoi preoţilor celor mai de seamă, căpeteniilor străjerilor Templului şi bătrânilor, cari veniseră împotriva Lui: ,,Aţi ieşit după Mine ca după un tâlhar, cu săbii şi cu ciomege?
53
În toate zilele eram cu voi în Templu, şi n-aţi pus mâna pe Mine. Dar acesta este ceasul vostru şi puterea întunerecului.``
54
Dupăce au pus mâna pe Isus, L-au dus şi L-au băgat în casa marelui preot. Petru mergea după El de departe.
55
Au aprins un foc în mijlocul curţii şi au şezut jos. Petru s-a aşezat şi el printre ei.
56
O slujnică l-a văzut cum şedea la para focului, s-a uitat ţintă la el, şi a zis: ,,Şi omul acesta era cu El.``
57
Dar Petru s-a lepădat, şi a zis: ,,Femeie, nu -L cunosc.``
58
Peste puţin, l-a văzut un altul şi a zis: ,,Şi tu eşti unul din oamenii aceia.`` Iar Petru a zis: ,,Omule, nu sânt dintre ei.``
59
Cam după un ceas, un altul întărea acelaş lucru, şi zicea: ,,Nu mai încape îndoială că şi omul acesta era cu El, căci este Galilean.``
60
Petru a răspuns: ,,Omule, nu ştiu ce zici.`` Chiar în clipa aceea, pe când vorbea el încă, a cântat cocoşul.
61
Domnul S-a întors, şi S-a uitat ţintă la Petru. Şi Petru şi-a adus aminte de vorba pe care i-o spusese Domnul: ,,Înainte ca să cânte cocoşul te vei lepăda de Mine de trei ori.``
62
Şi a ieşit afară, şi a plâns cu amar.
63
Oamenii, cari păzeau pe Isus, Îl batjocoreau şi -L băteau.
64
L-au legat la ochi, Îl loveau peste faţă, şi -L întrebau, zicând: ,,Prooroceşte, cine Te-a lovit?``
65
Şi rosteau împotriva Lui multe alte batjocori.
66
Când s-a făcut ziuă, bătrânii norodului, preoţii cei mai de seamă şi cărturarii s-au adunat împreună, şi au adus pe Isus în Soborul lor. Ei I-au zis:
67
,,Dacă eşti Tu Hristosul, spune-ne!`` Isus le-a răspuns: ,,Dacă vă voi spune, nu veţi crede;
68
şi dacă vă voi întreba, nu-Mi veţi răspunde, nici nu-Mi veţi da drumul.
69
Deacum încolo, Fiul omului va şedea la dreapta puterii lui Dumnezeu.``
70
Toţi au zis: ,,Eşti Tu dar Fiul lui Dumnezeu?`` Şi El le-a răspuns: ,,Aşa cum o spuneţi; da, sânt.``
71
Atunci ei au zis: ,,Ce nevoie mai avem de mărturie? Noi înşine am auzit-o din gura Lui.``
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":12178,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","title_en":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","summary_en":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23686,"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":28936,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Passion*","title_en":"Passion*","content_ro":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","summary_en":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56190,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:1-6<\/strong> The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:1-6<\/strong> The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:1-6 The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.","summary_en":"22:1-6 The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56191,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:1<\/strong> The <em>Passover<\/em> meal was held on the 15<sup>th<\/sup> of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day <em>Festival of Unleavened Bread<\/em> (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:1<\/strong> The <em>Passover<\/em> meal was held on the 15<sup>th<\/sup> of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day <em>Festival of Unleavened Bread<\/em> (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:1 The Passover meal was held on the 15th of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day Festival of Unleavened Bread (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.","summary_en":"22:1 The Passover meal was held on the 15th of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day Festival of Unleavened Bread (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83816,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:1-6<\/strong> The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:1-6<\/strong> The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:1-6 The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.","summary_en":"22:1-6 The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83817,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:1<\/strong> The <em>Passover<\/em> meal was held on the 15<sup>th<\/sup> of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day <em>Festival of Unleavened Bread<\/em> (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:1<\/strong> The <em>Passover<\/em> meal was held on the 15<sup>th<\/sup> of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day <em>Festival of Unleavened Bread<\/em> (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:1 The Passover meal was held on the 15th of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day Festival of Unleavened Bread (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.","summary_en":"22:1 The Passover meal was held on the 15th of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day Festival of Unleavened Bread (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111442,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:1-6<\/strong> The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:1-6<\/strong> The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:1-6 The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.","summary_en":"22:1-6 The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111443,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:1<\/strong> The <em>Passover<\/em> meal was held on the 15<sup>th<\/sup> of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day <em>Festival of Unleavened Bread<\/em> (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:1<\/strong> The <em>Passover<\/em> meal was held on the 15<sup>th<\/sup> of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day <em>Festival of Unleavened Bread<\/em> (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:1 The Passover meal was held on the 15th of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day Festival of Unleavened Bread (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.","summary_en":"22:1 The Passover meal was held on the 15th of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day Festival of Unleavened Bread (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139068,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:1-6<\/strong> The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:1-6<\/strong> The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:1-6 The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.","summary_en":"22:1-6 The religious leaders who had been plotting against Jesus (see 19:47) found their opportunity when Judas Iscariot approached them with an offer to betray Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139069,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:1","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:1<\/strong> The <em>Passover<\/em> meal was held on the 15<sup>th<\/sup> of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day <em>Festival of Unleavened Bread<\/em> (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:1<\/strong> The <em>Passover<\/em> meal was held on the 15<sup>th<\/sup> of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day <em>Festival of Unleavened Bread<\/em> (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:1 The Passover meal was held on the 15th of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day Festival of Unleavened Bread (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.","summary_en":"22:1 The Passover meal was held on the 15th of Nisan (March~April) in the Jewish calendar and was immediately followed by the seven-day Festival of Unleavened Bread (Exod 12:1-20; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1-8), sometimes also called Passover.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":41854,"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":42269,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69480,"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":69895,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97106,"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":97521,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124732,"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":125147,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9290,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Demon-Possession","title_en":"Demon-Possession","content_ro":"<h3>DEMON-POSSESSION<\/h3>\n<p>Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">daimonizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.”<\/p>\n<p>Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly differentiates an attack from without and control from within. Although a non-Christian may be said to be “possessed” by a demon, the Christian cannot be so possessed, for he belongs to Christ and his human spirit has been sealed by the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13). Demonic spirits somehow know and acknowledge this seal.<\/p>\n<p>Demons can also enter the bodies of animals, as in the case of the swine in Mark 5:13. Demons are associated with books of magic (Acts 19:19), idols (1 Cor 10:19-21), and fetishes. Demons often cause illness or physical disability; Luke 13:11 tells of a woman who had “been crippled by an evil spirit” for 18 years but was delivered and healed by Jesus. Since evil spirits often attack the mind and the emotions, many symptoms of mental illness may be attributed to their activity. The boy whom Jesus delivered just after the Transfiguration exhibited symptoms of epilepsy. Paranoia may be the work of a spirit of fear. Some individuals suffering from schizophrenia (split or multiple personality) may in reality be demonized by a number of spirits. It is possible for a person to have many demons. Jesus cast seven of them out of Mary Magdalene (Lk 8:2). The spirit in the Gerasene demoniac gave his name as Legion, “for we are many” (Mk 5:9; Lk 8:30). In the time of Augustus a Roman legion consisted of 6,000 foot soldiers, usually accompanied by an equal number of auxiliary troops.<\/p>\n<p>Demonization occurs in various ways. Some people are demonized by a hereditary curse, which may continue to the third or fourth generation (Ex 20:5). The curse against illegitimacy was particularly strong, for the bastard could not enter the congregation of Israel until the tenth generation (Dt 23:2). Curses may also be placed upon someone by spells, incantations, or similar practices such as voodoo or other forms of witchcraft. Galatians 3:13 speaks of redemption from the curse of the law through Christ’s having “become a curse” for us. Usually believers are immune from curses made against them, unless they have given grounds to the devil (Eph 4:27). Such grounds may be provided through drugs, illicit sex, the occult, or any other avenue forbidden in the Bible. Involvement with tarot cards, horoscopes, or any other form of fortune-telling may give demons opportunity to enter. Such contacts may seem innocuous, but Satan utilizes the smallest foothold to gain advantage over people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Manifestation\">Manifestation<\/p>\n<p>Often demons prefer to hide rather than to make their presence known, for then they can exercise control without hindrance. When they do manifest themselves, often when challenged, all sorts of strange and frightening things may occur. They possess supernatural powers (cf. Rv 16:14), which they exhibit outright or through their victims. The Gerasene demoniac had superhuman physical strength, so that he could not be bound with fetters or chains (Mk 5:4-5); he lived in tombs and went about night and day screaming and injuring himself with stones.<\/p>\n<p>The spirit in the demonized boy in Mark 9 rendered him dumb and deaf, threw him on the ground, and caused him to roll about and to foam at the mouth (9:18-20). The demon caused him to grind his teeth and become rigid; he had tried to kill the boy by throwing him into the fire and into the water on various occasions (vv 18-22). Before leaving at the command of Jesus, the demon cried out (cf. Mk 1:26), convulsed the boy terribly, and left him lying like a corpse. Jesus took him by the hand and raised him up (9:27). Similar manifestations take place today.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Exorcism\">Exorcism<\/p>\n<p>Casting out demons, or exorcism, was a regular and frequent part of the ministry of Jesus, and he taught and commanded his followers to do the same. This command has never been abrogated, and the ministry of deliverance should be even more important today, when the forces of evil are so rampant. The following principles are derived from the practice of Jesus, the Scriptures, and personal observation and involvement.<\/p>\n<p>1. Jesus spoke to demons and commanded them to come out (Mk 1:25; 9:25). He cast them out “with a word” (Mt 8:16). Jesus gave his followers authority to use his name in casting them out and used this as a sign of the believer (Mk 16:17). His name is not a magical formula, and its use depends on the relationship between the Lord and the person using his name, as the sons of Sceva found out to their dismay (Acts 19:11-18).<\/p>\n<li>2. Jesus cast out demons by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power to heal all who were oppressed by the devil (Lk 4:18-19; Acts 10:38).<\/li>\n<li>3. The Lord gave clear teaching about “the binding of the strong man” in deliverance (Mt 12:29; Mk 3:27) and about binding and loosing (Mt 18:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Prayer is an important weapon in spiritual warfare. When the disciples asked (Mk 9:28) why they could not cast out a demon, Jesus replied that this kind comes out only with prayer.<\/li>\n<li>5. Revelation 12:11 testifies to the power of “the blood of the Lamb” in overcoming Satan. Demons do not like to hear of the blood of Jesus and often become agitated at the mention of it.<\/li>\n<li>6. God has equipped the believer with armor for defense in spiritual battle (Eph 6:10-17).<\/li>\n<li>7. The Lord answered Satan with correctly applied texts from the Bible. We have been given the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God (Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12), as a means of defense and for attack against the enemy.<\/li>\n<li>8. We must come against the hosts of hell from our position in the heavenly places (Eph 2:6), not from our limited earthly station.<\/li>\n<li>9. We must recognize that the ultimate victory has already been won by Jesus, who came to destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn 3:8) and to destroy him who has the power of death (Heb 2:14-16). When Jesus cried out on the cross, “It is finished,” he meant that the redemptive work was done; when he arose from the dead, he demonstrated his power over death. We win only as we enter into his victory.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Demon.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEMON-POSSESSION<\/h3>\n<p>Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">daimonizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.”<\/p>\n<p>Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly differentiates an attack from without and control from within. Although a non-Christian may be said to be “possessed” by a demon, the Christian cannot be so possessed, for he belongs to Christ and his human spirit has been sealed by the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13). Demonic spirits somehow know and acknowledge this seal.<\/p>\n<p>Demons can also enter the bodies of animals, as in the case of the swine in Mark 5:13. Demons are associated with books of magic (Acts 19:19), idols (1 Cor 10:19-21), and fetishes. Demons often cause illness or physical disability; Luke 13:11 tells of a woman who had “been crippled by an evil spirit” for 18 years but was delivered and healed by Jesus. Since evil spirits often attack the mind and the emotions, many symptoms of mental illness may be attributed to their activity. The boy whom Jesus delivered just after the Transfiguration exhibited symptoms of epilepsy. Paranoia may be the work of a spirit of fear. Some individuals suffering from schizophrenia (split or multiple personality) may in reality be demonized by a number of spirits. It is possible for a person to have many demons. Jesus cast seven of them out of Mary Magdalene (Lk 8:2). The spirit in the Gerasene demoniac gave his name as Legion, “for we are many” (Mk 5:9; Lk 8:30). In the time of Augustus a Roman legion consisted of 6,000 foot soldiers, usually accompanied by an equal number of auxiliary troops.<\/p>\n<p>Demonization occurs in various ways. Some people are demonized by a hereditary curse, which may continue to the third or fourth generation (Ex 20:5). The curse against illegitimacy was particularly strong, for the bastard could not enter the congregation of Israel until the tenth generation (Dt 23:2). Curses may also be placed upon someone by spells, incantations, or similar practices such as voodoo or other forms of witchcraft. Galatians 3:13 speaks of redemption from the curse of the law through Christ’s having “become a curse” for us. Usually believers are immune from curses made against them, unless they have given grounds to the devil (Eph 4:27). Such grounds may be provided through drugs, illicit sex, the occult, or any other avenue forbidden in the Bible. Involvement with tarot cards, horoscopes, or any other form of fortune-telling may give demons opportunity to enter. Such contacts may seem innocuous, but Satan utilizes the smallest foothold to gain advantage over people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Manifestation\">Manifestation<\/p>\n<p>Often demons prefer to hide rather than to make their presence known, for then they can exercise control without hindrance. When they do manifest themselves, often when challenged, all sorts of strange and frightening things may occur. They possess supernatural powers (cf. Rv 16:14), which they exhibit outright or through their victims. The Gerasene demoniac had superhuman physical strength, so that he could not be bound with fetters or chains (Mk 5:4-5); he lived in tombs and went about night and day screaming and injuring himself with stones.<\/p>\n<p>The spirit in the demonized boy in Mark 9 rendered him dumb and deaf, threw him on the ground, and caused him to roll about and to foam at the mouth (9:18-20). The demon caused him to grind his teeth and become rigid; he had tried to kill the boy by throwing him into the fire and into the water on various occasions (vv 18-22). Before leaving at the command of Jesus, the demon cried out (cf. Mk 1:26), convulsed the boy terribly, and left him lying like a corpse. Jesus took him by the hand and raised him up (9:27). Similar manifestations take place today.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Exorcism\">Exorcism<\/p>\n<p>Casting out demons, or exorcism, was a regular and frequent part of the ministry of Jesus, and he taught and commanded his followers to do the same. This command has never been abrogated, and the ministry of deliverance should be even more important today, when the forces of evil are so rampant. The following principles are derived from the practice of Jesus, the Scriptures, and personal observation and involvement.<\/p>\n<p>1. Jesus spoke to demons and commanded them to come out (Mk 1:25; 9:25). He cast them out “with a word” (Mt 8:16). Jesus gave his followers authority to use his name in casting them out and used this as a sign of the believer (Mk 16:17). His name is not a magical formula, and its use depends on the relationship between the Lord and the person using his name, as the sons of Sceva found out to their dismay (Acts 19:11-18).<\/p>\n<li>2. Jesus cast out demons by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power to heal all who were oppressed by the devil (Lk 4:18-19; Acts 10:38).<\/li>\n<li>3. The Lord gave clear teaching about “the binding of the strong man” in deliverance (Mt 12:29; Mk 3:27) and about binding and loosing (Mt 18:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Prayer is an important weapon in spiritual warfare. When the disciples asked (Mk 9:28) why they could not cast out a demon, Jesus replied that this kind comes out only with prayer.<\/li>\n<li>5. Revelation 12:11 testifies to the power of “the blood of the Lamb” in overcoming Satan. Demons do not like to hear of the blood of Jesus and often become agitated at the mention of it.<\/li>\n<li>6. God has equipped the believer with armor for defense in spiritual battle (Eph 6:10-17).<\/li>\n<li>7. The Lord answered Satan with correctly applied texts from the Bible. We have been given the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God (Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12), as a means of defense and for attack against the enemy.<\/li>\n<li>8. We must come against the hosts of hell from our position in the heavenly places (Eph 2:6), not from our limited earthly station.<\/li>\n<li>9. We must recognize that the ultimate victory has already been won by Jesus, who came to destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn 3:8) and to destroy him who has the power of death (Heb 2:14-16). When Jesus cried out on the cross, “It is finished,” he meant that the redemptive work was done; when he arose from the dead, he demonstrated his power over death. We win only as we enter into his victory.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Demon.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEMON-POSSESSION Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word daimonizomai, which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.” Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly diffe...","summary_en":"DEMON-POSSESSION Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word daimonizomai, which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.” Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly diffe...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21122,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judas","title_en":"Judas","content_ro":"<h3>JUDAS<\/h3>\n<li>1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his betrayal of Jesus.<\/li>\n<p>Judas Iscariot’s name appears last in the list of disciples (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:19; Lk 6:16), perhaps indicating his ignominy in the minds of later believers rather than his original importance among the Twelve. During Jesus’ public ministry, he managed the treasury of the group (Jn 13:29), from which he was known to pilfer money (12:6). As a betrayer, Judas contracted to turn Jesus over to the chief priests for 30 pieces of silver. He accomplished this act of treachery by singling out Jesus with a kiss in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:14-47; Mk 14:10-46; Lk 22:3-48; Jn 18:2-5).<\/p>\n<p>Various suggestions have been offered to explain Judas’s traitorous deed. (1) In keeping with his patriotic zeal, Judas turned Jesus over to the authorities after realizing that his Master did not intend to overthrow the Roman order and establish a Jewish state. (2) Judas believed Jesus to be the Messiah and planned his arrest in hope of urging Jesus to usher in his kingdom. (3) He was a scoundrel who had plotted wickedness since the start of Jesus’ public ministry. (4) Prompted by a satanic impulse, Judas betrayed Jesus; however, after recognizing that he was deceived, out of remorse he took his own life. (5) With damaged pride and humiliated ego from Jesus’ caustic rebukes, Judas, originally a loyal disciple, turned against him. (6) Judas, moved by his own greed, yielded to his selfish instincts, not realizing that Jesus would consequently be tried and killed; upon learning the outcome of his betrayal, he repented in despair and committed suicide.<\/p>\n<p>Judas, despondent over his act of betrayal, went out and hung himself in a field bought with his 30 pieces of silver (Mt 27:3-10). Acts 1:18 gruesomely adds that his body burst open, spilling out his intestines; for this reason the field was called the “Field of Blood” (Acts 1:19). Matthias later took Judas Iscariot’s place among the Twelve (v 26).<\/p>\n<li>2. Son of Joseph and Mary, and the brother of Jesus, James, Joseph, and Simon (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Evidently Judas and his brothers rejected Jesus as Messiah (Jn 7:5) until after his resurrection (Acts 1:14). Later, it is thought, Judas (English “Jude”) authored the epistle named Jude.<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of James and one of the 12 disciples (Lk 6:16; Jn 14:22; Acts 1:13). He is identifiable with Thaddeus in Matthew 10:3 and Mark 3:18. <em>See<\/em> Thaddaeus, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>4. Galilean who led a Jewish revolt against the Romans because of the census taken by Quirinius in <span>AD<\/span> 6. In Acts 5:37 the Pharisee Gamaliel mentioned Judas as an example of one who unsuccessfully tried to gain the support of the Jewish people. Josephus credited him with founding the Jewish Zealot party, an extreme revolutionary movement that attempted to throw off Roman rule and to reestablish Jewish autonomy (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.1).<\/li>\n<li>5. Owner of a house along the street called Straight in Damascus. Here, following his conversion, Saul (Paul) found lodging and had his vision restored by Ananias (Acts 9:11).<\/li>\n<li>6. Prophet and leader in the early Jerusalem church. Judas, surnamed Barsabbas, was selected with Silas to accompany Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, where they confirmed the Jerusalem Council’s decision regarding the gentile church and subsequently encouraged its believers (Acts 15:22-32). <em>See<\/em> Joseph #12.<\/li>\n<li>7. KJV spelling of Judah, Jacob’s son (Mt 1:2-3). <em>See<\/em> Judah (Person) #1.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JUDAS<\/h3>\n<li>1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his betrayal of Jesus.<\/li>\n<p>Judas Iscariot’s name appears last in the list of disciples (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:19; Lk 6:16), perhaps indicating his ignominy in the minds of later believers rather than his original importance among the Twelve. During Jesus’ public ministry, he managed the treasury of the group (Jn 13:29), from which he was known to pilfer money (12:6). As a betrayer, Judas contracted to turn Jesus over to the chief priests for 30 pieces of silver. He accomplished this act of treachery by singling out Jesus with a kiss in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:14-47; Mk 14:10-46; Lk 22:3-48; Jn 18:2-5).<\/p>\n<p>Various suggestions have been offered to explain Judas’s traitorous deed. (1) In keeping with his patriotic zeal, Judas turned Jesus over to the authorities after realizing that his Master did not intend to overthrow the Roman order and establish a Jewish state. (2) Judas believed Jesus to be the Messiah and planned his arrest in hope of urging Jesus to usher in his kingdom. (3) He was a scoundrel who had plotted wickedness since the start of Jesus’ public ministry. (4) Prompted by a satanic impulse, Judas betrayed Jesus; however, after recognizing that he was deceived, out of remorse he took his own life. (5) With damaged pride and humiliated ego from Jesus’ caustic rebukes, Judas, originally a loyal disciple, turned against him. (6) Judas, moved by his own greed, yielded to his selfish instincts, not realizing that Jesus would consequently be tried and killed; upon learning the outcome of his betrayal, he repented in despair and committed suicide.<\/p>\n<p>Judas, despondent over his act of betrayal, went out and hung himself in a field bought with his 30 pieces of silver (Mt 27:3-10). Acts 1:18 gruesomely adds that his body burst open, spilling out his intestines; for this reason the field was called the “Field of Blood” (Acts 1:19). Matthias later took Judas Iscariot’s place among the Twelve (v 26).<\/p>\n<li>2. Son of Joseph and Mary, and the brother of Jesus, James, Joseph, and Simon (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Evidently Judas and his brothers rejected Jesus as Messiah (Jn 7:5) until after his resurrection (Acts 1:14). Later, it is thought, Judas (English “Jude”) authored the epistle named Jude.<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of James and one of the 12 disciples (Lk 6:16; Jn 14:22; Acts 1:13). He is identifiable with Thaddeus in Matthew 10:3 and Mark 3:18. <em>See<\/em> Thaddaeus, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>4. Galilean who led a Jewish revolt against the Romans because of the census taken by Quirinius in <span>AD<\/span> 6. In Acts 5:37 the Pharisee Gamaliel mentioned Judas as an example of one who unsuccessfully tried to gain the support of the Jewish people. Josephus credited him with founding the Jewish Zealot party, an extreme revolutionary movement that attempted to throw off Roman rule and to reestablish Jewish autonomy (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.1).<\/li>\n<li>5. Owner of a house along the street called Straight in Damascus. Here, following his conversion, Saul (Paul) found lodging and had his vision restored by Ananias (Acts 9:11).<\/li>\n<li>6. Prophet and leader in the early Jerusalem church. Judas, surnamed Barsabbas, was selected with Silas to accompany Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, where they confirmed the Jerusalem Council’s decision regarding the gentile church and subsequently encouraged its believers (Acts 15:22-32). <em>See<\/em> Joseph #12.<\/li>\n<li>7. KJV spelling of Judah, Jacob’s son (Mt 1:2-3). <em>See<\/em> Judah (Person) #1.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JUDAS 1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his...","summary_en":"JUDAS 1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56192,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:3","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:3<\/strong> <em>Satan entered into Judas Iscariot:<\/em> See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:3<\/strong> <em>Satan entered into Judas Iscariot:<\/em> See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:3 Satan entered into Judas Iscariot: See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).","summary_en":"22:3 Satan entered into Judas Iscariot: See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83818,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:3","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:3<\/strong> <em>Satan entered into Judas Iscariot:<\/em> See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:3<\/strong> <em>Satan entered into Judas Iscariot:<\/em> See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:3 Satan entered into Judas Iscariot: See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).","summary_en":"22:3 Satan entered into Judas Iscariot: See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111444,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:3","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:3<\/strong> <em>Satan entered into Judas Iscariot:<\/em> See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:3<\/strong> <em>Satan entered into Judas Iscariot:<\/em> See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:3 Satan entered into Judas Iscariot: See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).","summary_en":"22:3 Satan entered into Judas Iscariot: See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139070,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:3","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:3<\/strong> <em>Satan entered into Judas Iscariot:<\/em> See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:3<\/strong> <em>Satan entered into Judas Iscariot:<\/em> See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:3 Satan entered into Judas Iscariot: See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).","summary_en":"22:3 Satan entered into Judas Iscariot: See John 13:2; Acts 5:3. Satan had previously tempted Jesus (Luke 4:2) and had been waiting for this opportunity (4:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65077,"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":92703,"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":120329,"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":147955,"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}],"4":[{"id":4772,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12218,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","title_en":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","summary_en":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56193,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:4","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:4<\/strong> <em>captains of the Temple guard:<\/em> The Temple had its own police force.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:4<\/strong> <em>captains of the Temple guard:<\/em> The Temple had its own police force.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:4 captains of the Temple guard: The Temple had its own police force.","summary_en":"22:4 captains of the Temple guard: The Temple had its own police force.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83819,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:4","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:4<\/strong> <em>captains of the Temple guard:<\/em> The Temple had its own police force.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:4<\/strong> <em>captains of the Temple guard:<\/em> The Temple had its own police force.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:4 captains of the Temple guard: The Temple had its own police force.","summary_en":"22:4 captains of the Temple guard: The Temple had its own police force.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111445,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:4","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:4<\/strong> <em>captains of the Temple guard:<\/em> The Temple had its own police force.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:4<\/strong> <em>captains of the Temple guard:<\/em> The Temple had its own police force.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:4 captains of the Temple guard: The Temple had its own police force.","summary_en":"22:4 captains of the Temple guard: The Temple had its own police force.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139071,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:4","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:4<\/strong> <em>captains of the Temple guard:<\/em> The Temple had its own police force.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:4<\/strong> <em>captains of the Temple guard:<\/em> The Temple had its own police force.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:4 captains of the Temple guard: The Temple had its own police force.","summary_en":"22:4 captains of the Temple guard: The Temple had its own police force.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":56194,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:5","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:5<\/strong> Judas wanted the <em>money<\/em>. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:5<\/strong> Judas wanted the <em>money<\/em>. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:5 Judas wanted the money. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).","summary_en":"22:5 Judas wanted the money. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83820,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:5","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:5<\/strong> Judas wanted the <em>money<\/em>. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:5<\/strong> Judas wanted the <em>money<\/em>. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:5 Judas wanted the money. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).","summary_en":"22:5 Judas wanted the money. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111446,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:5","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:5<\/strong> Judas wanted the <em>money<\/em>. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:5<\/strong> Judas wanted the <em>money<\/em>. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:5 Judas wanted the money. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).","summary_en":"22:5 Judas wanted the money. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139072,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:5","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:5<\/strong> Judas wanted the <em>money<\/em>. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:5<\/strong> Judas wanted the <em>money<\/em>. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:5 Judas wanted the money. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).","summary_en":"22:5 Judas wanted the money. John tells us that he was a thief who stole from the disciples’ common fund (John 12:6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":56195,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:6","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:6<\/strong> <em>when the crowds weren’t around:<\/em> This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:6<\/strong> <em>when the crowds weren’t around:<\/em> This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:6 when the crowds weren’t around: This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.","summary_en":"22:6 when the crowds weren’t around: This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83821,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:6","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:6<\/strong> <em>when the crowds weren’t around:<\/em> This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:6<\/strong> <em>when the crowds weren’t around:<\/em> This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:6 when the crowds weren’t around: This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.","summary_en":"22:6 when the crowds weren’t around: This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111447,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:6","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:6<\/strong> <em>when the crowds weren’t around:<\/em> This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:6<\/strong> <em>when the crowds weren’t around:<\/em> This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:6 when the crowds weren’t around: This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.","summary_en":"22:6 when the crowds weren’t around: This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139073,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:6","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:6<\/strong> <em>when the crowds weren’t around:<\/em> This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:6<\/strong> <em>when the crowds weren’t around:<\/em> This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:6 when the crowds weren’t around: This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.","summary_en":"22:6 when the crowds weren’t around: This was because of Jesus’ popularity among the people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":23487,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23687,"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":56196,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:7-30<\/strong> Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as <em>the Passover lamb<\/em>. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:7-30<\/strong> Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as <em>the Passover lamb<\/em>. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:7-30 Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as the Passover lamb. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.","summary_en":"22:7-30 Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as the Passover lamb. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56197,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:7<\/strong> The <em>Passover lamb<\/em> was <em>sacrificed<\/em> at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:7<\/strong> The <em>Passover lamb<\/em> was <em>sacrificed<\/em> at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:7 The Passover lamb was sacrificed at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).","summary_en":"22:7 The Passover lamb was sacrificed at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83822,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:7-30<\/strong> Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as <em>the Passover lamb<\/em>. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:7-30<\/strong> Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as <em>the Passover lamb<\/em>. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:7-30 Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as the Passover lamb. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.","summary_en":"22:7-30 Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as the Passover lamb. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83823,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:7<\/strong> The <em>Passover lamb<\/em> was <em>sacrificed<\/em> at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:7<\/strong> The <em>Passover lamb<\/em> was <em>sacrificed<\/em> at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:7 The Passover lamb was sacrificed at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).","summary_en":"22:7 The Passover lamb was sacrificed at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111448,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:7-30<\/strong> Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as <em>the Passover lamb<\/em>. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:7-30<\/strong> Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as <em>the Passover lamb<\/em>. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:7-30 Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as the Passover lamb. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.","summary_en":"22:7-30 Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as the Passover lamb. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111449,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:7<\/strong> The <em>Passover lamb<\/em> was <em>sacrificed<\/em> at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:7<\/strong> The <em>Passover lamb<\/em> was <em>sacrificed<\/em> at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:7 The Passover lamb was sacrificed at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).","summary_en":"22:7 The Passover lamb was sacrificed at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139074,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:7-30<\/strong> Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as <em>the Passover lamb<\/em>. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:7-30<\/strong> Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as <em>the Passover lamb<\/em>. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:7-30 Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as the Passover lamb. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.","summary_en":"22:7-30 Jesus celebrated the traditional Jewish Passover but transformed it with reference to his own sacrificial death as the Passover lamb. He also prepared his disciples for his coming death and the leadership role they would assume over his church.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139075,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:7","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:7<\/strong> The <em>Passover lamb<\/em> was <em>sacrificed<\/em> at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:7<\/strong> The <em>Passover lamb<\/em> was <em>sacrificed<\/em> at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:7 The Passover lamb was sacrificed at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).","summary_en":"22:7 The Passover lamb was sacrificed at twilight, and Passover was celebrated in the evening (see Exod 12:6-8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65647,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66089,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93273,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93715,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120899,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121341,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148525,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148967,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":42174,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69800,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97426,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125052,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20136,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John, the Apostle","title_en":"John, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, The Apostle<\/h3>\n<p>The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, there is not a great deal on which to base a biography.<\/p>\n<p>John’s father’s name was Zebedee, and John had a brother called James (Mt 4:21). Among the women at the cross, Matthew names Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and “the mother of Zebedee’s children” (27:56). Mark names the two Marys and adds Salome (Mk 15:40). This indicates that Salome may be the name of John’s mother. If Matthew and Mark are naming the same women as does John, then Salome was Jesus’ “mother’s sister” (Jn 19:25). This would make John a cousin of Jesus. We cannot be certain of this, for there were many women there (Mt 27:55) and there is no way of being sure that Matthew, Mark, and John all name the same three. Many accept the identification, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>John was among those whom Jesus called by the Sea of Galilee (Mt 4:21-22; Mk 1:19-20). This makes him one of the first disciples. It is also possible that he was the unnamed companion of Andrew when that apostle first followed Jesus (Jn 1:35-37). John was important in the little group around Jesus since he was one of three who were especially close to the Master. These disciples were selected to be with Jesus on many great occasions. John, along with his brother James and Peter, was present at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; Mk 9:2; Lk 9:28-29). Jesus also took just these three into the house of Jairus when he brought that man’s daughter back to life (Mk 5:37; Lk 8:51). Before Jesus’ arrest, it was this trio that he took to pray with him in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:37; Mk 14:33). Though the three were admonished for sleeping instead of watching in prayer, we must not overlook the fact that in that time of great difficulty, when Jesus faced the prospect of death on a cross, it was to these three that he looked for support.<\/p>\n<p>There are other occasions when John is mentioned in the Gospels. Luke tells us of John’s surprise when the miraculous catch of fish took place (Lk 5:9-10). This is especially noteworthy since John was a fisherman. Toward the close of Jesus’ ministry, we find John coming to Jesus with Peter, James, and Andrew to ask when the end would come and what would be the sign when all things come to their climax (Mk 13:3-4). And on the last evening, Jesus sent Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal (Lk 22:8).<\/p>\n<p>Passages like these show that John was highly esteemed among the apostles and that he stood especially close to Jesus. But there are indications that at first John was far from appreciating what Jesus stood for. When Mark gives his list of the Twelve, he tells us that Jesus gave to James and John the name “Boanerges,” which means “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17). Some in the early church understood this name as a compliment, thinking it meant that James’s and John’s witness to Jesus would be as strong as thunder. But most see it as pointing to their tempestuousness of character. We see this, for example, when John encounters a man who was casting out demons in Jesus’ name. John instructs him not to, “for he isn’t one of our group” (Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49).<\/p>\n<p>Mark also tells us of an occasion when the sons of Zebedee asked Jesus for the two chief places in his kingdom, one to be on his right and the other on his left (Mk 10:35-40). Matthew adds the point that the words were spoken by the men’s mother, but he leaves us no doubt that James and John were in on it (Mt 20:20-22). Jesus proceeded to ask them whether they could drink the cup he would drink and be baptized with the baptism he would receive. (Clearly, these are metaphors for the suffering Jesus would in due course undergo.) James and John affirmed that they could, and Jesus assured them that they would indeed do this. However, he gave them no assurance about their places in the Father’s kingdom. (But it is plain that James and John would suffer for Christ.) At that time they also failed to understand the loving spirit that moved their Master and was required of them as well.<\/p>\n<p>Another incident that shows the same tempestuous spirit is one involving Samaritan villagers who refused to receive the little band as they traveled. When James and John heard of it, they asked Jesus whether he wanted them to call down fire from heaven to consume the villagers (Lk 9:54). They were clearly at variance with Jesus, and indeed he rebuked them. But we should not miss the zeal they displayed for their Lord, nor their conviction that if they did call down fire it would come. They were sure that God would not fail to answer the prayer of those who asked for vengeance on the opponents of Jesus. There is zeal here and faith, though also a spirit of lovelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels thus show us John as a zealous and loyal follower of Jesus. He is not depicted as gentle and considerate. At this time, he knew little of the love that should characterize a follower of Jesus, but he did have faith and a passionate conviction that God would prosper Jesus and those who served him.<\/p>\n<p>John is not mentioned by name in the fourth Gospel, but there are passages that speak about “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20). We are not told who this was, but the evidence seems to indicate that it was the apostle John. For example, there is an account of a fishing trip in chapter 21, with a listing of those who went fishing. It includes Peter, who must be ruled out as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” because he is often mentioned along with the beloved disciple. Thomas and Nathanael were there, but there seems to be no reason for seeing either as a likely candidate. Two unnamed men and the sons of Zebedee make up the remainder of the party. James is excluded as being the author because of his early death—around <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:2). This leaves us with John or one of the unnamed men. John is favored by the fact that the beloved disciple is linked with Peter on a number of occasions (Jn 13:23-24; 20:2; 21:7). We know from the other Gospels that Peter and John (together with James) were especially close (see also Acts 3; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Of course, one of the unnamed disciples may have been the beloved disciple, but we have no reason to assume this. Further, such a supposition faces the problem of the omission of the name of John the apostle throughout the entire fourth Gospel. If John wrote this book, we can understand his not mentioning himself. But if it was written by someone else, why would that person omit all mention of a man as prominent in the apostolic band as the other Gospels show John to have been? In addition, if John is the author, it would explain why John the Baptist is called simply “John.”<\/p>\n<p>It is argued that “the disciple whom Jesus loved” is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of himself, but it must be said also that it is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of someone else, either. And it may be that John uses it in a modest fashion—partly because he did not want to draw attention to himself by using his name, and partly because he wanted to emphasize the truth that it was the fact that Jesus loved him that made him what he was.<\/p>\n<p>If this identification may be accepted, we learn more about the apostle. We should not, of course, read the words “the disciple whom Jesus loved” as though they meant that Jesus did not love the other disciples. He loved them all. But as applied to John, they mean that he was indeed beloved, probably also that he recognized that he owed all he had and all he was to that love. That he was specially close to Jesus is indicated by the fact that he leaned on Jesus’ breast at the Last Supper (Jn 13:23). It also tells us something of his relationship to the Master that he was at the cross when Christ was crucified and that it was to him that Jesus gave the charge to look after his mother (19:26-27). One would have expected that Jesus would have selected one of his family for this responsibility. But his brothers did not believe in him, whereas both John and Mary did. This event certainly shows that a close relationship existed between Jesus and the disciple he loved.<\/p>\n<p>On the first Easter morning, John raced with Peter to the tomb when Mary Magdalene told them it was empty. He won the race but stood outside the tomb until Peter came. Peter, the leader of men, went right in, and John followed. We read that he “saw and believed” (Jn 20:8). Then in chapter 21 we read of the beloved disciple fishing with the others. Significantly, it was he who recognized that it was Jesus who stood on the shore and told them where to cast the net (21:7).<\/p>\n<p>There is not much to add to this picture when we turn to Acts. At the beginning, John’s name occurs in a list of the Twelve (Acts 1:13); and later, when we are told of James’s death, it is noted that he was John’s brother (12:2). In every other reference to John, he is in the company of Peter. These two were the instruments God used in bringing healing to a lame man (ch 3). At that time, they were going to the temple at the hour of prayer. This says something about their habits of devotion. Prayer at the ninth hour apparently refers to the Jewish service of prayer that was held at the same time as the evening offering (i.e., at about three o’clock in the afternoon). Evidently, Peter and John were continuing the devotional habits of pious Jews with an interest in the temple and all its doings. On another occasion, these two were arrested and jailed on account of their preaching about Jesus’ resurrection (4:1-3). They were brought before the council, where Peter spoke for them. The council saw that these two men were “uneducated, common men” (v 13). This means that they had never had the normal rabbinic education. By the standards of the council, they were uneducated. The council forbade them to speak about Jesus, but the apostles’ reply displays John’s typical boldness: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge; for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (vv 19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>John was associated with Peter again when the gospel was first preached in Samaria. Philip was the evangelist to the Samaritans, but the apostles in Jerusalem decided to send Peter and John to Samaria when they heard how the people had accepted the gospel message. “As soon as they arrived, they began praying for these new Christians to receive the Holy Spirit” (Acts 8:15, <span>tlb<\/span>), a revealing illustration of apostolic priorities. In due course, they laid their hands on the new believers and they received the Holy Spirit (8:17). John is not specifically mentioned, but he no doubt was included in “the apostles” who were arrested and jailed because of the jealousy of prominent Jews (5:17-18). But that imprisonment did not last long, for an angel released them at night, so that they resumed their preaching in the early morning (v 21). John is mentioned by name in Galatians 2:9, where he is joined with Peter and James and the three are called “the pillars of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>This appears to be the extent of the NT’s record of the apostle John. Clearly he was an important figure in the little band of early Christians. On almost every occasion when he comes before us in the record, he is in the company of someone else and normally the speaking is done by his companion, not by John. But we may justly conclude that he stood very close to Jesus. Perhaps he had entered into the mind of Jesus more than any of the others. The best evidence of this is the Gospel of John. Clearly the man who wrote this had great spiritual insight. John may have been more the thinker than a man of action and leader of men.<\/p>\n<p>We have seen that there is good reason to think that the fourth Gospel was written by the apostle John. The epistles of John probably came from him also (though, as they stand, they are anonymous). All the Johannine writings probably emanated from the province of Asia. The heretics alluded to in 1 John resemble the Cerinthians (followers of the heretic Cerinthus), who were in Asia Minor at the end of the first century, and tradition connects the author of 1 John with Ephesus. It is certain that the same person wrote all three letters, and reasonably certain that this author also wrote the Gospel of John; the Gospel and the letters certainly represent the same mind at work in different situations.<\/p>\n<p>An author named John wrote the book of Revelation (Rv 1:1), though it is not clear whether this is the apostle or another John. Tradition has identified the John of Revelation (see Rv 1:1, 9; 22:8) with John the apostle, the author of the Gospel of John and the three letters of John. This view was held by Justin Martyr as early as 140. The main objection to this view is that the original Greek is unlike that of the other Johannine writings, showing scant respect for the rules of the language. Some have suggested that a different John wrote Revelation, others that John’s disciples wrote the Gospel and letters and that John himself wrote Revelation. But it is still plausible that the apostle John (or one of his close disciples) wrote the Gospel and the letters.<\/p>\n<p>Assuming John the apostle wrote Revelation, he was exiled to Patmos (Rv 1:9). But the date of this is uncertain. Some probably unreliable evidence from the late fifth century suggests that John was martyred at about the same time as his brother James (c. 44; see also Acts 12:2). Jesus’ prophecy in Mk 10:39 need not imply that both met with a simultaneous and violent end. Much stronger is the tradition reflected by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus (c. 190), that John died a natural death in Ephesus, and by Irenaeus (c. 175–195) that John lingered on in Ephesus until the time of the emperor Trajan (ruled c. 97–117).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, The Apostle<\/h3>\n<p>The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, there is not a great deal on which to base a biography.<\/p>\n<p>John’s father’s name was Zebedee, and John had a brother called James (Mt 4:21). Among the women at the cross, Matthew names Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and “the mother of Zebedee’s children” (27:56). Mark names the two Marys and adds Salome (Mk 15:40). This indicates that Salome may be the name of John’s mother. If Matthew and Mark are naming the same women as does John, then Salome was Jesus’ “mother’s sister” (Jn 19:25). This would make John a cousin of Jesus. We cannot be certain of this, for there were many women there (Mt 27:55) and there is no way of being sure that Matthew, Mark, and John all name the same three. Many accept the identification, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>John was among those whom Jesus called by the Sea of Galilee (Mt 4:21-22; Mk 1:19-20). This makes him one of the first disciples. It is also possible that he was the unnamed companion of Andrew when that apostle first followed Jesus (Jn 1:35-37). John was important in the little group around Jesus since he was one of three who were especially close to the Master. These disciples were selected to be with Jesus on many great occasions. John, along with his brother James and Peter, was present at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; Mk 9:2; Lk 9:28-29). Jesus also took just these three into the house of Jairus when he brought that man’s daughter back to life (Mk 5:37; Lk 8:51). Before Jesus’ arrest, it was this trio that he took to pray with him in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:37; Mk 14:33). Though the three were admonished for sleeping instead of watching in prayer, we must not overlook the fact that in that time of great difficulty, when Jesus faced the prospect of death on a cross, it was to these three that he looked for support.<\/p>\n<p>There are other occasions when John is mentioned in the Gospels. Luke tells us of John’s surprise when the miraculous catch of fish took place (Lk 5:9-10). This is especially noteworthy since John was a fisherman. Toward the close of Jesus’ ministry, we find John coming to Jesus with Peter, James, and Andrew to ask when the end would come and what would be the sign when all things come to their climax (Mk 13:3-4). And on the last evening, Jesus sent Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal (Lk 22:8).<\/p>\n<p>Passages like these show that John was highly esteemed among the apostles and that he stood especially close to Jesus. But there are indications that at first John was far from appreciating what Jesus stood for. When Mark gives his list of the Twelve, he tells us that Jesus gave to James and John the name “Boanerges,” which means “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17). Some in the early church understood this name as a compliment, thinking it meant that James’s and John’s witness to Jesus would be as strong as thunder. But most see it as pointing to their tempestuousness of character. We see this, for example, when John encounters a man who was casting out demons in Jesus’ name. John instructs him not to, “for he isn’t one of our group” (Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49).<\/p>\n<p>Mark also tells us of an occasion when the sons of Zebedee asked Jesus for the two chief places in his kingdom, one to be on his right and the other on his left (Mk 10:35-40). Matthew adds the point that the words were spoken by the men’s mother, but he leaves us no doubt that James and John were in on it (Mt 20:20-22). Jesus proceeded to ask them whether they could drink the cup he would drink and be baptized with the baptism he would receive. (Clearly, these are metaphors for the suffering Jesus would in due course undergo.) James and John affirmed that they could, and Jesus assured them that they would indeed do this. However, he gave them no assurance about their places in the Father’s kingdom. (But it is plain that James and John would suffer for Christ.) At that time they also failed to understand the loving spirit that moved their Master and was required of them as well.<\/p>\n<p>Another incident that shows the same tempestuous spirit is one involving Samaritan villagers who refused to receive the little band as they traveled. When James and John heard of it, they asked Jesus whether he wanted them to call down fire from heaven to consume the villagers (Lk 9:54). They were clearly at variance with Jesus, and indeed he rebuked them. But we should not miss the zeal they displayed for their Lord, nor their conviction that if they did call down fire it would come. They were sure that God would not fail to answer the prayer of those who asked for vengeance on the opponents of Jesus. There is zeal here and faith, though also a spirit of lovelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels thus show us John as a zealous and loyal follower of Jesus. He is not depicted as gentle and considerate. At this time, he knew little of the love that should characterize a follower of Jesus, but he did have faith and a passionate conviction that God would prosper Jesus and those who served him.<\/p>\n<p>John is not mentioned by name in the fourth Gospel, but there are passages that speak about “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20). We are not told who this was, but the evidence seems to indicate that it was the apostle John. For example, there is an account of a fishing trip in chapter 21, with a listing of those who went fishing. It includes Peter, who must be ruled out as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” because he is often mentioned along with the beloved disciple. Thomas and Nathanael were there, but there seems to be no reason for seeing either as a likely candidate. Two unnamed men and the sons of Zebedee make up the remainder of the party. James is excluded as being the author because of his early death—around <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:2). This leaves us with John or one of the unnamed men. John is favored by the fact that the beloved disciple is linked with Peter on a number of occasions (Jn 13:23-24; 20:2; 21:7). We know from the other Gospels that Peter and John (together with James) were especially close (see also Acts 3; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Of course, one of the unnamed disciples may have been the beloved disciple, but we have no reason to assume this. Further, such a supposition faces the problem of the omission of the name of John the apostle throughout the entire fourth Gospel. If John wrote this book, we can understand his not mentioning himself. But if it was written by someone else, why would that person omit all mention of a man as prominent in the apostolic band as the other Gospels show John to have been? In addition, if John is the author, it would explain why John the Baptist is called simply “John.”<\/p>\n<p>It is argued that “the disciple whom Jesus loved” is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of himself, but it must be said also that it is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of someone else, either. And it may be that John uses it in a modest fashion—partly because he did not want to draw attention to himself by using his name, and partly because he wanted to emphasize the truth that it was the fact that Jesus loved him that made him what he was.<\/p>\n<p>If this identification may be accepted, we learn more about the apostle. We should not, of course, read the words “the disciple whom Jesus loved” as though they meant that Jesus did not love the other disciples. He loved them all. But as applied to John, they mean that he was indeed beloved, probably also that he recognized that he owed all he had and all he was to that love. That he was specially close to Jesus is indicated by the fact that he leaned on Jesus’ breast at the Last Supper (Jn 13:23). It also tells us something of his relationship to the Master that he was at the cross when Christ was crucified and that it was to him that Jesus gave the charge to look after his mother (19:26-27). One would have expected that Jesus would have selected one of his family for this responsibility. But his brothers did not believe in him, whereas both John and Mary did. This event certainly shows that a close relationship existed between Jesus and the disciple he loved.<\/p>\n<p>On the first Easter morning, John raced with Peter to the tomb when Mary Magdalene told them it was empty. He won the race but stood outside the tomb until Peter came. Peter, the leader of men, went right in, and John followed. We read that he “saw and believed” (Jn 20:8). Then in chapter 21 we read of the beloved disciple fishing with the others. Significantly, it was he who recognized that it was Jesus who stood on the shore and told them where to cast the net (21:7).<\/p>\n<p>There is not much to add to this picture when we turn to Acts. At the beginning, John’s name occurs in a list of the Twelve (Acts 1:13); and later, when we are told of James’s death, it is noted that he was John’s brother (12:2). In every other reference to John, he is in the company of Peter. These two were the instruments God used in bringing healing to a lame man (ch 3). At that time, they were going to the temple at the hour of prayer. This says something about their habits of devotion. Prayer at the ninth hour apparently refers to the Jewish service of prayer that was held at the same time as the evening offering (i.e., at about three o’clock in the afternoon). Evidently, Peter and John were continuing the devotional habits of pious Jews with an interest in the temple and all its doings. On another occasion, these two were arrested and jailed on account of their preaching about Jesus’ resurrection (4:1-3). They were brought before the council, where Peter spoke for them. The council saw that these two men were “uneducated, common men” (v 13). This means that they had never had the normal rabbinic education. By the standards of the council, they were uneducated. The council forbade them to speak about Jesus, but the apostles’ reply displays John’s typical boldness: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge; for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (vv 19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>John was associated with Peter again when the gospel was first preached in Samaria. Philip was the evangelist to the Samaritans, but the apostles in Jerusalem decided to send Peter and John to Samaria when they heard how the people had accepted the gospel message. “As soon as they arrived, they began praying for these new Christians to receive the Holy Spirit” (Acts 8:15, <span>tlb<\/span>), a revealing illustration of apostolic priorities. In due course, they laid their hands on the new believers and they received the Holy Spirit (8:17). John is not specifically mentioned, but he no doubt was included in “the apostles” who were arrested and jailed because of the jealousy of prominent Jews (5:17-18). But that imprisonment did not last long, for an angel released them at night, so that they resumed their preaching in the early morning (v 21). John is mentioned by name in Galatians 2:9, where he is joined with Peter and James and the three are called “the pillars of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>This appears to be the extent of the NT’s record of the apostle John. Clearly he was an important figure in the little band of early Christians. On almost every occasion when he comes before us in the record, he is in the company of someone else and normally the speaking is done by his companion, not by John. But we may justly conclude that he stood very close to Jesus. Perhaps he had entered into the mind of Jesus more than any of the others. The best evidence of this is the Gospel of John. Clearly the man who wrote this had great spiritual insight. John may have been more the thinker than a man of action and leader of men.<\/p>\n<p>We have seen that there is good reason to think that the fourth Gospel was written by the apostle John. The epistles of John probably came from him also (though, as they stand, they are anonymous). All the Johannine writings probably emanated from the province of Asia. The heretics alluded to in 1 John resemble the Cerinthians (followers of the heretic Cerinthus), who were in Asia Minor at the end of the first century, and tradition connects the author of 1 John with Ephesus. It is certain that the same person wrote all three letters, and reasonably certain that this author also wrote the Gospel of John; the Gospel and the letters certainly represent the same mind at work in different situations.<\/p>\n<p>An author named John wrote the book of Revelation (Rv 1:1), though it is not clear whether this is the apostle or another John. Tradition has identified the John of Revelation (see Rv 1:1, 9; 22:8) with John the apostle, the author of the Gospel of John and the three letters of John. This view was held by Justin Martyr as early as 140. The main objection to this view is that the original Greek is unlike that of the other Johannine writings, showing scant respect for the rules of the language. Some have suggested that a different John wrote Revelation, others that John’s disciples wrote the Gospel and letters and that John himself wrote Revelation. But it is still plausible that the apostle John (or one of his close disciples) wrote the Gospel and the letters.<\/p>\n<p>Assuming John the apostle wrote Revelation, he was exiled to Patmos (Rv 1:9). But the date of this is uncertain. Some probably unreliable evidence from the late fifth century suggests that John was martyred at about the same time as his brother James (c. 44; see also Acts 12:2). Jesus’ prophecy in Mk 10:39 need not imply that both met with a simultaneous and violent end. Much stronger is the tradition reflected by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus (c. 190), that John died a natural death in Ephesus, and by Irenaeus (c. 175–195) that John lingered on in Ephesus until the time of the emperor Trajan (ruled c. 97–117).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, The Apostle The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation. The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, t...","summary_en":"JOHN, The Apostle The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation. The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, t...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30039,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56198,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:8","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:8<\/strong> <em>Go and prepare the Passover meal:<\/em> The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:8<\/strong> <em>Go and prepare the Passover meal:<\/em> The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:8 Go and prepare the Passover meal: The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.","summary_en":"22:8 Go and prepare the Passover meal: The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83824,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:8","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:8<\/strong> <em>Go and prepare the Passover meal:<\/em> The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:8<\/strong> <em>Go and prepare the Passover meal:<\/em> The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:8 Go and prepare the Passover meal: The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.","summary_en":"22:8 Go and prepare the Passover meal: The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111450,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:8","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:8<\/strong> <em>Go and prepare the Passover meal:<\/em> The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:8<\/strong> <em>Go and prepare the Passover meal:<\/em> The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:8 Go and prepare the Passover meal: The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.","summary_en":"22:8 Go and prepare the Passover meal: The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139076,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:8","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:8<\/strong> <em>Go and prepare the Passover meal:<\/em> The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:8<\/strong> <em>Go and prepare the Passover meal:<\/em> The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:8 Go and prepare the Passover meal: The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.","summary_en":"22:8 Go and prepare the Passover meal: The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs and unleavened bread at the Passover meal (Exod 12:8; Num 9:11-12; Deut 16:3). The bitter herbs represented the bitterness of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt, and the unleavened bread recalled their haste in leaving Egypt.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":56199,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:10","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:10<\/strong> <em>A man carrying a pitcher of water<\/em> would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:10<\/strong> <em>A man carrying a pitcher of water<\/em> would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:10 A man carrying a pitcher of water would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.","summary_en":"22:10 A man carrying a pitcher of water would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83825,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:10","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:10<\/strong> <em>A man carrying a pitcher of water<\/em> would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:10<\/strong> <em>A man carrying a pitcher of water<\/em> would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:10 A man carrying a pitcher of water would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.","summary_en":"22:10 A man carrying a pitcher of water would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111451,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:10","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:10<\/strong> <em>A man carrying a pitcher of water<\/em> would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:10<\/strong> <em>A man carrying a pitcher of water<\/em> would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:10 A man carrying a pitcher of water would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.","summary_en":"22:10 A man carrying a pitcher of water would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139077,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:10","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:10<\/strong> <em>A man carrying a pitcher of water<\/em> would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:10<\/strong> <em>A man carrying a pitcher of water<\/em> would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:10 A man carrying a pitcher of water would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.","summary_en":"22:10 A man carrying a pitcher of water would have been an unusual sight, because women normally carried the water.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":17563,"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":56200,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:11","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:11-12<\/strong> The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:11-12<\/strong> The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:11-12 The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).","summary_en":"22:11-12 The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83826,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:11","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:11-12<\/strong> The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:11-12<\/strong> The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:11-12 The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).","summary_en":"22:11-12 The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111452,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:11","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:11-12<\/strong> The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:11-12<\/strong> The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:11-12 The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).","summary_en":"22:11-12 The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139078,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:11","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:11-12<\/strong> The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:11-12<\/strong> The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:11-12 The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).","summary_en":"22:11-12 The text does not say whether Jesus exhibited supernatural foreknowledge or whether he had made arrangements for this room ahead of time (see also 19:30-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":37876,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Upper Room","title_en":"Upper Room","content_ro":"<h3>UPPER ROOM<\/h3>\n<p>Second-story room of a Hebrew or a Greek house; often like a tower, built on the flat roof of a Hebrew home for privacy, for comfort during the hot season, or for the entertainment of guests. In some instances it could accommodate large gatherings of people. In at least one instance, the room was on the third story (Acts 20:8). Eutychus, sitting in the window, went to sleep and fell three stories to the street below (vv 9-10). It may have been a similar type of accident that caused Ahaziah’s fatal injury when he fell through the latticework of his upper room (2 Kgs 1:2).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah took the dead son of the widow of Zarephath to an upper room where he had been staying and raised him from the dead (1 Kgs 17:19-23). David went to an upper room for privacy to mourn the death of Absalom (2 Sm 18:33). The kings of Judah built strange altars near the upper room of Ahaz, which Josiah pulled down as part of his reform program (2 Kgs 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus ate the Passover supper in an upper room with his disciples (Mk 14:15; Lk 22:12). The size of some of these rooms is evident from the fact that, after Jesus had left and ascended to heaven, the disciples went to the upper room where they all had been staying before. The congregation attending the meeting in Troas was not a small one either (Acts 20:8). Dorcas was laid in an upper room after she had died; later, Peter was taken up to the same room to pray for her restoration to life (Acts 9:36-41).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Architecture; Homes and Dwellings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>UPPER ROOM<\/h3>\n<p>Second-story room of a Hebrew or a Greek house; often like a tower, built on the flat roof of a Hebrew home for privacy, for comfort during the hot season, or for the entertainment of guests. In some instances it could accommodate large gatherings of people. In at least one instance, the room was on the third story (Acts 20:8). Eutychus, sitting in the window, went to sleep and fell three stories to the street below (vv 9-10). It may have been a similar type of accident that caused Ahaziah’s fatal injury when he fell through the latticework of his upper room (2 Kgs 1:2).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah took the dead son of the widow of Zarephath to an upper room where he had been staying and raised him from the dead (1 Kgs 17:19-23). David went to an upper room for privacy to mourn the death of Absalom (2 Sm 18:33). The kings of Judah built strange altars near the upper room of Ahaz, which Josiah pulled down as part of his reform program (2 Kgs 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus ate the Passover supper in an upper room with his disciples (Mk 14:15; Lk 22:12). The size of some of these rooms is evident from the fact that, after Jesus had left and ascended to heaven, the disciples went to the upper room where they all had been staying before. The congregation attending the meeting in Troas was not a small one either (Acts 20:8). Dorcas was laid in an upper room after she had died; later, Peter was taken up to the same room to pray for her restoration to life (Acts 9:36-41).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Architecture; Homes and Dwellings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"UPPER ROOM Second-story room of a Hebrew or a Greek house; often like a tower, built on the flat roof of a Hebrew home for privacy, for comfort during the hot season, or for the entertainment of guests. In some instances it could accommodate large gatherings of people. In at least one instance, the room was on the third story (Acts 20:8). Eutychus, sitting in the window, went to sleep and fell three stories to the street below (vv 9-10). It may have been a similar type of accident that caused...","summary_en":"UPPER ROOM Second-story room of a Hebrew or a Greek house; often like a tower, built on the flat roof of a Hebrew home for privacy, for comfort during the hot season, or for the entertainment of guests. In some instances it could accommodate large gatherings of people. In at least one instance, the room was on the third story (Acts 20:8). Eutychus, sitting in the window, went to sleep and fell three stories to the street below (vv 9-10). It may have been a similar type of accident that caused...","source":"Articles\/U.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":3668,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Banquet","title_en":"Banquet","content_ro":"<h3>BANQUET<\/h3>\n<p>Lavish ceremonial meal, usually held in honor of some notable event or person; also a symbol of the feast to be given by Christ in the kingdom of God. Banqueting and feasting were major parts of the social and religious life of biblical times. In addition to the religious feasts prescribed by Mosaic law, banquets and feasts were celebrated on nearly any occasion of joy or solemnity: at the ratification of covenants (Gn 26:30; 31:54; Ex 24:11); at weddings (Gn 29:22; Jgs 14:10); at harvest (Jgs 9:27; Ru 3:1-3); at the shearing of sheep (1 Sm 25:11; 2 Sm 13:23-29); at the arrival of guests (Gn 19:3); at the weaning of a child (21:8); at coronations (1 Kgs 1:9, 19-25); on various state occasions (Est 1:3-9; 2:18; 5:4-8); and for many other reasons.<\/p>\n<p>Many customs associated with banquets in the ancient Near East are portrayed in the Bible and in extrabiblical literature; wall reliefs and carvings from some excavations also depict banquet scenes. The sequence of banquet preparation in Proverbs 9:2-5, Matthew 22:1-14, and Luke 14:15-24 is also known from the legend of King Keret in Ugaritic literature: (1) preparation of the foods, (2) sending messengers with the invitation and announcement that all is ready, and (3) the presentation of food and wine in order. The prophet Amos portrays a lavish feast and shows the main eating customs (Am 6:4-6). Meals were ordinarily taken while reclining on a couch before a table (Est 1:6; Ez 23:41; Am 6:4; Mt 9:10; Lk 7:49; 14:10, 15).<\/p>\n<p>Banquet imagery is prominent in both Testaments with reference to the kingdom of God. Isaiah foresaw the judgment of the nations and the deliverance of Israel followed by the Lord’s reign over his people (Is 24:23); inauguration of that reign is accompanied by a huge banquet to which all peoples are invited (Is 25:6-8; cf. Lk 13:29). Meals shared following the sacrifice of animals in the OT prefigure that great feast when there will be no more death, tears, or reproach for the people of God (Is 25:7; cf. Rv 21:4). The banquet of the new covenant likewise directs attention to the future, when the redeemed will drink fine wine (Is 25:6) with Christ in the kingdom of God (Lk 22:14-20). By participating in the Lord’s Supper (Communion), all Christians anticipate that great feast.<\/p>\n<p>That future, final banquet in the kingdom of God is also pictured specifically as a wedding feast; all is in readiness, the invitation is issued to many, but few are chosen (Mt 22:1-14). The church looks forward to the marriage feast of the Lamb (Rv 19:7-9).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BANQUET<\/h3>\n<p>Lavish ceremonial meal, usually held in honor of some notable event or person; also a symbol of the feast to be given by Christ in the kingdom of God. Banqueting and feasting were major parts of the social and religious life of biblical times. In addition to the religious feasts prescribed by Mosaic law, banquets and feasts were celebrated on nearly any occasion of joy or solemnity: at the ratification of covenants (Gn 26:30; 31:54; Ex 24:11); at weddings (Gn 29:22; Jgs 14:10); at harvest (Jgs 9:27; Ru 3:1-3); at the shearing of sheep (1 Sm 25:11; 2 Sm 13:23-29); at the arrival of guests (Gn 19:3); at the weaning of a child (21:8); at coronations (1 Kgs 1:9, 19-25); on various state occasions (Est 1:3-9; 2:18; 5:4-8); and for many other reasons.<\/p>\n<p>Many customs associated with banquets in the ancient Near East are portrayed in the Bible and in extrabiblical literature; wall reliefs and carvings from some excavations also depict banquet scenes. The sequence of banquet preparation in Proverbs 9:2-5, Matthew 22:1-14, and Luke 14:15-24 is also known from the legend of King Keret in Ugaritic literature: (1) preparation of the foods, (2) sending messengers with the invitation and announcement that all is ready, and (3) the presentation of food and wine in order. The prophet Amos portrays a lavish feast and shows the main eating customs (Am 6:4-6). Meals were ordinarily taken while reclining on a couch before a table (Est 1:6; Ez 23:41; Am 6:4; Mt 9:10; Lk 7:49; 14:10, 15).<\/p>\n<p>Banquet imagery is prominent in both Testaments with reference to the kingdom of God. Isaiah foresaw the judgment of the nations and the deliverance of Israel followed by the Lord’s reign over his people (Is 24:23); inauguration of that reign is accompanied by a huge banquet to which all peoples are invited (Is 25:6-8; cf. Lk 13:29). Meals shared following the sacrifice of animals in the OT prefigure that great feast when there will be no more death, tears, or reproach for the people of God (Is 25:7; cf. Rv 21:4). The banquet of the new covenant likewise directs attention to the future, when the redeemed will drink fine wine (Is 25:6) with Christ in the kingdom of God (Lk 22:14-20). By participating in the Lord’s Supper (Communion), all Christians anticipate that great feast.<\/p>\n<p>That future, final banquet in the kingdom of God is also pictured specifically as a wedding feast; all is in readiness, the invitation is issued to many, but few are chosen (Mt 22:1-14). The church looks forward to the marriage feast of the Lamb (Rv 19:7-9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BANQUET Lavish ceremonial meal, usually held in honor of some notable event or person; also a symbol of the feast to be given by Christ in the kingdom of God. Banqueting and feasting were major parts of the social and religious life of biblical times. In addition to the religious feasts prescribed by Mosaic law, banquets and feasts were celebrated on nearly any occasion of joy or solemnity: at the ratification of covenants (Gn 26:30; 31:54; Ex 24:11); at weddings (Gn 29:22; Jgs 14:10); at har...","summary_en":"BANQUET Lavish ceremonial meal, usually held in honor of some notable event or person; also a symbol of the feast to be given by Christ in the kingdom of God. Banqueting and feasting were major parts of the social and religious life of biblical times. In addition to the religious feasts prescribed by Mosaic law, banquets and feasts were celebrated on nearly any occasion of joy or solemnity: at the ratification of covenants (Gn 26:30; 31:54; Ex 24:11); at weddings (Gn 29:22; Jgs 14:10); at har...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4210,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Disciple*, Beloved","title_en":"Disciple*, Beloved","content_ro":"<h3>BELOVED DISCIPLE*<\/h3>\n<p>Designation of one disciple, evidently the author of the Gospel of John (Jn 21:20-24). Five passages in John’s Gospel mention the disciple whom Jesus loved: (1) The disciple whom Jesus loved lay close to Jesus’ chest during the Last Supper and was beckoned by Peter to ask Jesus who the betrayer would be (13:21-26). (2) The disciple whom Jesus loved stood near the cross, and Mary the mother of Jesus was given to his care (19:25-27). (3) Mary Magdalene came to Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved, reporting that Jesus’ body was missing from the tomb (20:2). (4) The disciple whom Jesus loved was in a fishing boat with Peter and the other disciples and recognized Jesus standing on the shore (21:7). (5) The disciple whom Jesus loved was following Jesus by the lakeshore, and the author reminded his readers that this was the same disciple spoken of at the Last Supper (21:20-23; cf. 13:21-26).<\/p>\n<p>Because the phrase is found only in John’s Gospel, could it be the author’s way of referring to himself? Several passages make that seem very likely.<\/p>\n<p>A list of names given in John 21:2 indicates that the disciples present at the lakeshore were Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee (James and John), and two others. Evidently the beloved disciple was one of the sons of Zebedee or else one of the two unnamed disciples.<\/p>\n<p>The beloved disciple was almost certainly one of the Twelve, since he was present at the Last Supper, and evidently only the 12 disciples were there with Jesus (Mt 26:20; Mk 14:17-20; Lk 22:14, 30). That eliminates Lazarus and John Mark, who have sometimes been suggested as possibilities for the beloved disciple.<\/p>\n<p>The beloved disciple appeared to be close to Peter (Jn 13:23-24; 20:2; 21:7; see also Acts 3; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Matthew, Mark, and Luke record that Peter, James, and John were constantly selected by Jesus to be with him. Since Peter was mentioned in connection with the disciple whom Jesus loved, and since James was martyred early (Acts 12:2), only John is left as a reasonable possibility—if, as is generally regarded, John’s Gospel was written long after James’s death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BELOVED DISCIPLE*<\/h3>\n<p>Designation of one disciple, evidently the author of the Gospel of John (Jn 21:20-24). Five passages in John’s Gospel mention the disciple whom Jesus loved: (1) The disciple whom Jesus loved lay close to Jesus’ chest during the Last Supper and was beckoned by Peter to ask Jesus who the betrayer would be (13:21-26). (2) The disciple whom Jesus loved stood near the cross, and Mary the mother of Jesus was given to his care (19:25-27). (3) Mary Magdalene came to Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved, reporting that Jesus’ body was missing from the tomb (20:2). (4) The disciple whom Jesus loved was in a fishing boat with Peter and the other disciples and recognized Jesus standing on the shore (21:7). (5) The disciple whom Jesus loved was following Jesus by the lakeshore, and the author reminded his readers that this was the same disciple spoken of at the Last Supper (21:20-23; cf. 13:21-26).<\/p>\n<p>Because the phrase is found only in John’s Gospel, could it be the author’s way of referring to himself? Several passages make that seem very likely.<\/p>\n<p>A list of names given in John 21:2 indicates that the disciples present at the lakeshore were Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee (James and John), and two others. Evidently the beloved disciple was one of the sons of Zebedee or else one of the two unnamed disciples.<\/p>\n<p>The beloved disciple was almost certainly one of the Twelve, since he was present at the Last Supper, and evidently only the 12 disciples were there with Jesus (Mt 26:20; Mk 14:17-20; Lk 22:14, 30). That eliminates Lazarus and John Mark, who have sometimes been suggested as possibilities for the beloved disciple.<\/p>\n<p>The beloved disciple appeared to be close to Peter (Jn 13:23-24; 20:2; 21:7; see also Acts 3; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Matthew, Mark, and Luke record that Peter, James, and John were constantly selected by Jesus to be with him. Since Peter was mentioned in connection with the disciple whom Jesus loved, and since James was martyred early (Acts 12:2), only John is left as a reasonable possibility—if, as is generally regarded, John’s Gospel was written long after James’s death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BELOVED DISCIPLE* Designation of one disciple, evidently the author of the Gospel of John (Jn 21:20-24). Five passages in John’s Gospel mention the disciple whom Jesus loved: (1) The disciple whom Jesus loved lay close to Jesus’ chest during the Last Supper and was beckoned by Peter to ask Jesus who the betrayer would be (13:21-26). (2) The disciple whom Jesus loved stood near the cross, and Mary the mother of Jesus was given to his care (19:25-27). (3) Mary Magdalene came to Peter and the di...","summary_en":"BELOVED DISCIPLE* Designation of one disciple, evidently the author of the Gospel of John (Jn 21:20-24). Five passages in John’s Gospel mention the disciple whom Jesus loved: (1) The disciple whom Jesus loved lay close to Jesus’ chest during the Last Supper and was beckoned by Peter to ask Jesus who the betrayer would be (13:21-26). (2) The disciple whom Jesus loved stood near the cross, and Mary the mother of Jesus was given to his care (19:25-27). (3) Mary Magdalene came to Peter and the di...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23480,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56201,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:14","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:14<\/strong> <em>sat down together at the table<\/em> (or <em>reclined together<\/em>): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:14<\/strong> <em>sat down together at the table<\/em> (or <em>reclined together<\/em>): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:14 sat down together at the table (or reclined together): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).","summary_en":"22:14 sat down together at the table (or reclined together): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83827,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:14","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:14<\/strong> <em>sat down together at the table<\/em> (or <em>reclined together<\/em>): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:14<\/strong> <em>sat down together at the table<\/em> (or <em>reclined together<\/em>): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:14 sat down together at the table (or reclined together): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).","summary_en":"22:14 sat down together at the table (or reclined together): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111453,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:14","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:14<\/strong> <em>sat down together at the table<\/em> (or <em>reclined together<\/em>): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:14<\/strong> <em>sat down together at the table<\/em> (or <em>reclined together<\/em>): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:14 sat down together at the table (or reclined together): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).","summary_en":"22:14 sat down together at the table (or reclined together): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139079,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:14","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:14<\/strong> <em>sat down together at the table<\/em> (or <em>reclined together<\/em>): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:14<\/strong> <em>sat down together at the table<\/em> (or <em>reclined together<\/em>): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:14 sat down together at the table (or reclined together): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).","summary_en":"22:14 sat down together at the table (or reclined together): The Jewish people followed Hellenistic practice at banquets by reclining on couches (see study note on John 13:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65014,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66104,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92640,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93730,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120266,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121356,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147892,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148982,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":5414,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Body of Christ","title_en":"Body of Christ","content_ro":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","summary_en":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6478,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible* (New Testament), Chronology","title_en":"of the Bible* (New Testament), Chronology","content_ro":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.<\/p>\n\n<p>A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into <span>BC<\/span> (before Christ) and <span>AD<\/span> (<em>anno Domini,<\/em> “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChronologyofJesusLife\">Chronology of Jesus’ Life<\/p>\n<h5>Birth<\/h5>\n<p>According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century <span>AD<\/span> historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 <span>BC<\/span>. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.<\/p>\n<p>Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 <span>BC<\/span>. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in <span>AD<\/span> 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginning of Public Ministry<\/h5>\n<p>Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets <span>AD<\/span> 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely <span>AD<\/span> 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before <span>AD<\/span> 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in <span>AD<\/span> 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is <span>AD<\/span> 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.<\/p>\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 50<\/h4>\n<p>Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks\/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.<\/p>\n<p>After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.<\/p>\n<p>One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in <span>AD<\/span> 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.<\/p>\n<p>Since Herod Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.<\/p>\n<p>When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.<\/p>\n<p>The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).<\/p>\n\n<p>Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas\/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of those arguments for chronology is that, according to the first view, Paul’s conversion came 17 years before the famine visit of Acts 11:30 (cf. Gal 1:18; 2:1). According to the second view, Paul’s conversion took place 17 years before the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The difference amounts to only one year, however.<\/p>\n<p>It is helpful to consider one more date that can be fixed with high probability—namely, Paul’s arrival in Corinth on his second missionary journey (Acts 18:1). On the second missionary journey (15:40–18:22), Paul and Silas set out on land through Syria, Cilicia, Phrygia, and Galatia, visiting churches founded on the first missionary journey. They came to Troas, then passed over to Philippi and continued down the coast through Thessalonica and Berea. Paul went on to Athens before arriving at Corinth. From Acts 18:12 we know that Gallio was a proconsul in Corinth while Paul was there. An inscription discovered at nearby Delphi indicates that in all likelihood Gallio’s term of office was from mid-51 to mid-52. The incident recorded in Acts 18:12-17 probably occurred at the beginning of Gallio’s term, since the Jews hoped to get a ruling against Paul from their new proconsul. Not long after that, Paul left Corinth, probably in the summer or autumn of 52. According to Acts 18:11 Paul had spent 18 months in Corinth; that means that he probably arrived in the early months of 50 or the end of 49. That arrival date is confirmed by Acts 18:2, which says that Aquila and Priscilla had only recently been exiled from Rome when Paul came to Corinth. A fifth-century historian, Orosius, dated the edict of Claudius expelling the Jews from Rome in <span>AD<\/span> 49. Therefore, Paul and Aquila and Priscilla probably arrived close together late in 49 or early in 50. Early in his 18-month stay Paul wrote his First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians.<\/p>\n<p>The two fixed dates, then, are 46 or 47 for the famine visit (Acts 11:30) and late 49 or early 50 for Paul’s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18:1). Taking into account the time gaps mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and 2:1, as well as the supposition that the first missionary journey lasted about a year, the two reconstructions are presented in the following table. Keep in mind that they are approximations and that they reflect the ancient custom of counting a part of a year as a whole year.<\/p>\n\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 70<\/h4>\n<p>Acts 24:27 describes an event that helps us date events in the rest of the book, namely, Porcius Festus’s replacement of Felix as the governor of Judea. A careful analysis of the evidence given by Eusebius, a fourth-century historian, leads to the probable conclusion that Felix was replaced in the summer of 59.<\/p>\n<p>Working backward from that date, Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21:33) must have occurred in 57, some two years before the coming of Festus. More precisely, Paul’s arrest probably occurred in the late spring or summer of 57; Paul’s goal (20:16) was to arrive in Jerusalem by Pentecost of that year, and Pentecost occurred at the end of May. He was not long in the city before he was arrested.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover festival, 50 days before Pentecost, was celebrated by Paul with the church in Philippi (Acts 20:6). That would have been April 7–14, <span>AD<\/span> 57. Only after the feast did he continue his hurried journey to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:6–21:16). Before his Passover visit to Philippi, Paul had spent three months in Greece (20:3). Allowing some time for him to travel through Macedonia and visit the Thessalonians and Bereans, those three months were probably the winter months of 56–57 (Acts 20:3; cf. 1 Cor 16:6). No doubt they were spent in the main church of Greece, Corinth, and were used in part for the writing of the Letter to the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Between Paul’s departure from Corinth on the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18) in the autumn of 51 and his arrival in Corinth on the third missionary journey (20:2) in the late winter of 56 are five years of activities that cannot be given exact dates. Paul said that he worked during three of those years in Ephesus (20:31; cf. 19:1–20:1). With enough time allowed for the travels before and after, that stay at Ephesus probably lasted from 52 or 53 to the summer of 55 or 56 (cf. 1 Cor 16:8). During his long stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote his First Letter to the Corinthians. Then, on his way to Corinth in 56, he wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia.<\/p>\n<p>Festus arrived as governor in the summer of 59, after Paul had been in prison in Caesarea for two years. Within a matter of days, Paul was tried before Festus (Acts 25:1-12). Not wanting to be remanded to the Jewish authorities, Paul appealed to Caesar (v 12), which meant that he would go to Rome. The account in Acts gives no hint of a delay, so the voyage most likely began in the summer or fall of 59 (27:2).<\/p>\n<p>Luke reported that when Paul the prisoner got to Fair Havens on the island of Crete, the weather had become dangerous for sea travel “because the fast had already gone by” (Acts 27:8-9). One ancient writer said that sailing became dangerous between mid-September and mid-November, and after that, impossible until spring. The fast referred to was no doubt the one in preparation for the Day of Atonement, which in the year 59 fell on October 5. It is not surprising that, 14 days after leaving Fair Havens, the ship in which Paul was traveling was wrecked on the coast of Malta, south of Sicily (vv 27-44). Three months later Paul set sail for Rome again in a ship that had spent the winter at Malta (28:11). Soon he was welcomed into Rome by Christians who came out to meet him (v 15). Thus Paul arrived in Rome in the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 60. The book of Acts closes with the remark that “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house” (v 30, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT does not report the outcome of his trial. During that period, according to the traditional view, he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius wrote, “Tradition has it that after defending himself the Apostle was again sent on the ministry of preaching, and coming a second time to the same city suffered martyrdom under Nero.” Nero, who was the Roman emperor from 54 to 68, put to death a multitude of Christians in Rome soon after a disastrous fire in July of 64, according to the Roman historian Tacitus. A number of early Christian writings (e.g., Clement) seem to indicate that Peter and Paul were both killed in Rome during that savage persecution. If so, and if Eusebius was right, then Paul may have spent the two years from 62 to 64 freely ministering back in the eastern provinces. Many conservative scholars date Paul’s First Letter to Timothy and his Letter to Titus from that period. Written from Rome shortly before Paul’s martyrdom in 64, 2 Timothy was probably his last letter (2 Tm 2:9; 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Jerusalem, within three years after Paul had been carried off to Rome, James the brother of Jesus was stoned to death by the Jewish authorities. According to Josephus, that occurred in 62. Not long afterward, according to Eusebius, the church in Jerusalem received a prophecy warning them to leave that doomed city and settle in Pella, one of the cities of the Decapolis (“ten cities”) east of the Jordan. Thus when war broke out between the Jews and the Romans in 66, the Christians for the most part escaped its fury. That war ended in 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Mk 13:2; Lk 21:24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Apostle, Apostleship; Age; “Date” under each NT book; First Jewish Revolt; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.<\/p>\n\n<p>A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into <span>BC<\/span> (before Christ) and <span>AD<\/span> (<em>anno Domini,<\/em> “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChronologyofJesusLife\">Chronology of Jesus’ Life<\/p>\n<h5>Birth<\/h5>\n<p>According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century <span>AD<\/span> historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 <span>BC<\/span>. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.<\/p>\n<p>Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 <span>BC<\/span>. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in <span>AD<\/span> 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginning of Public Ministry<\/h5>\n<p>Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets <span>AD<\/span> 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely <span>AD<\/span> 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before <span>AD<\/span> 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in <span>AD<\/span> 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is <span>AD<\/span> 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.<\/p>\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 50<\/h4>\n<p>Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks\/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.<\/p>\n<p>After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.<\/p>\n<p>One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in <span>AD<\/span> 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.<\/p>\n<p>Since Herod Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.<\/p>\n<p>When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.<\/p>\n<p>The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).<\/p>\n\n<p>Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas\/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of those arguments for chronology is that, according to the first view, Paul’s conversion came 17 years before the famine visit of Acts 11:30 (cf. Gal 1:18; 2:1). According to the second view, Paul’s conversion took place 17 years before the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The difference amounts to only one year, however.<\/p>\n<p>It is helpful to consider one more date that can be fixed with high probability—namely, Paul’s arrival in Corinth on his second missionary journey (Acts 18:1). On the second missionary journey (15:40–18:22), Paul and Silas set out on land through Syria, Cilicia, Phrygia, and Galatia, visiting churches founded on the first missionary journey. They came to Troas, then passed over to Philippi and continued down the coast through Thessalonica and Berea. Paul went on to Athens before arriving at Corinth. From Acts 18:12 we know that Gallio was a proconsul in Corinth while Paul was there. An inscription discovered at nearby Delphi indicates that in all likelihood Gallio’s term of office was from mid-51 to mid-52. The incident recorded in Acts 18:12-17 probably occurred at the beginning of Gallio’s term, since the Jews hoped to get a ruling against Paul from their new proconsul. Not long after that, Paul left Corinth, probably in the summer or autumn of 52. According to Acts 18:11 Paul had spent 18 months in Corinth; that means that he probably arrived in the early months of 50 or the end of 49. That arrival date is confirmed by Acts 18:2, which says that Aquila and Priscilla had only recently been exiled from Rome when Paul came to Corinth. A fifth-century historian, Orosius, dated the edict of Claudius expelling the Jews from Rome in <span>AD<\/span> 49. Therefore, Paul and Aquila and Priscilla probably arrived close together late in 49 or early in 50. Early in his 18-month stay Paul wrote his First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians.<\/p>\n<p>The two fixed dates, then, are 46 or 47 for the famine visit (Acts 11:30) and late 49 or early 50 for Paul’s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18:1). Taking into account the time gaps mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and 2:1, as well as the supposition that the first missionary journey lasted about a year, the two reconstructions are presented in the following table. Keep in mind that they are approximations and that they reflect the ancient custom of counting a part of a year as a whole year.<\/p>\n\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 70<\/h4>\n<p>Acts 24:27 describes an event that helps us date events in the rest of the book, namely, Porcius Festus’s replacement of Felix as the governor of Judea. A careful analysis of the evidence given by Eusebius, a fourth-century historian, leads to the probable conclusion that Felix was replaced in the summer of 59.<\/p>\n<p>Working backward from that date, Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21:33) must have occurred in 57, some two years before the coming of Festus. More precisely, Paul’s arrest probably occurred in the late spring or summer of 57; Paul’s goal (20:16) was to arrive in Jerusalem by Pentecost of that year, and Pentecost occurred at the end of May. He was not long in the city before he was arrested.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover festival, 50 days before Pentecost, was celebrated by Paul with the church in Philippi (Acts 20:6). That would have been April 7–14, <span>AD<\/span> 57. Only after the feast did he continue his hurried journey to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:6–21:16). Before his Passover visit to Philippi, Paul had spent three months in Greece (20:3). Allowing some time for him to travel through Macedonia and visit the Thessalonians and Bereans, those three months were probably the winter months of 56–57 (Acts 20:3; cf. 1 Cor 16:6). No doubt they were spent in the main church of Greece, Corinth, and were used in part for the writing of the Letter to the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Between Paul’s departure from Corinth on the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18) in the autumn of 51 and his arrival in Corinth on the third missionary journey (20:2) in the late winter of 56 are five years of activities that cannot be given exact dates. Paul said that he worked during three of those years in Ephesus (20:31; cf. 19:1–20:1). With enough time allowed for the travels before and after, that stay at Ephesus probably lasted from 52 or 53 to the summer of 55 or 56 (cf. 1 Cor 16:8). During his long stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote his First Letter to the Corinthians. Then, on his way to Corinth in 56, he wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia.<\/p>\n<p>Festus arrived as governor in the summer of 59, after Paul had been in prison in Caesarea for two years. Within a matter of days, Paul was tried before Festus (Acts 25:1-12). Not wanting to be remanded to the Jewish authorities, Paul appealed to Caesar (v 12), which meant that he would go to Rome. The account in Acts gives no hint of a delay, so the voyage most likely began in the summer or fall of 59 (27:2).<\/p>\n<p>Luke reported that when Paul the prisoner got to Fair Havens on the island of Crete, the weather had become dangerous for sea travel “because the fast had already gone by” (Acts 27:8-9). One ancient writer said that sailing became dangerous between mid-September and mid-November, and after that, impossible until spring. The fast referred to was no doubt the one in preparation for the Day of Atonement, which in the year 59 fell on October 5. It is not surprising that, 14 days after leaving Fair Havens, the ship in which Paul was traveling was wrecked on the coast of Malta, south of Sicily (vv 27-44). Three months later Paul set sail for Rome again in a ship that had spent the winter at Malta (28:11). Soon he was welcomed into Rome by Christians who came out to meet him (v 15). Thus Paul arrived in Rome in the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 60. The book of Acts closes with the remark that “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house” (v 30, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT does not report the outcome of his trial. During that period, according to the traditional view, he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius wrote, “Tradition has it that after defending himself the Apostle was again sent on the ministry of preaching, and coming a second time to the same city suffered martyrdom under Nero.” Nero, who was the Roman emperor from 54 to 68, put to death a multitude of Christians in Rome soon after a disastrous fire in July of 64, according to the Roman historian Tacitus. A number of early Christian writings (e.g., Clement) seem to indicate that Peter and Paul were both killed in Rome during that savage persecution. If so, and if Eusebius was right, then Paul may have spent the two years from 62 to 64 freely ministering back in the eastern provinces. Many conservative scholars date Paul’s First Letter to Timothy and his Letter to Titus from that period. Written from Rome shortly before Paul’s martyrdom in 64, 2 Timothy was probably his last letter (2 Tm 2:9; 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Jerusalem, within three years after Paul had been carried off to Rome, James the brother of Jesus was stoned to death by the Jewish authorities. According to Josephus, that occurred in 62. Not long afterward, according to Eusebius, the church in Jerusalem received a prophecy warning them to leave that doomed city and settle in Pella, one of the cities of the Decapolis (“ten cities”) east of the Jordan. Thus when war broke out between the Jews and the Romans in 66, the Christians for the most part escaped its fury. That war ended in 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Mk 13:2; Lk 21:24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Apostle, Apostleship; Age; “Date” under each NT book; First Jewish Revolt; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates. A rema...","summary_en":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates. A rema...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23489,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56202,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:15","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:15<\/strong> Jesus ate the <em>Passover meal<\/em> with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:15<\/strong> Jesus ate the <em>Passover meal<\/em> with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:15 Jesus ate the Passover meal with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).","summary_en":"22:15 Jesus ate the Passover meal with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83828,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:15","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:15<\/strong> Jesus ate the <em>Passover meal<\/em> with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:15<\/strong> Jesus ate the <em>Passover meal<\/em> with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:15 Jesus ate the Passover meal with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).","summary_en":"22:15 Jesus ate the Passover meal with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111454,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:15","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:15<\/strong> Jesus ate the <em>Passover meal<\/em> with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:15<\/strong> Jesus ate the <em>Passover meal<\/em> with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:15 Jesus ate the Passover meal with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).","summary_en":"22:15 Jesus ate the Passover meal with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139080,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:15","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:15<\/strong> Jesus ate the <em>Passover meal<\/em> with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:15<\/strong> Jesus ate the <em>Passover meal<\/em> with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:15 Jesus ate the Passover meal with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).","summary_en":"22:15 Jesus ate the Passover meal with his disciples and followed the ritual order of the Passover celebration (see study note on Matt 26:26-29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60155,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60337,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87781,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87963,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115407,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115589,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143033,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143215,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":56203,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:16","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:16<\/strong> <em>until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God:<\/em> This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:16<\/strong> <em>until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God:<\/em> This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:16 until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God: This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.","summary_en":"22:16 until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God: This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83829,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:16","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:16<\/strong> <em>until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God:<\/em> This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:16<\/strong> <em>until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God:<\/em> This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:16 until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God: This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.","summary_en":"22:16 until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God: This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111455,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:16","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:16<\/strong> <em>until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God:<\/em> This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:16<\/strong> <em>until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God:<\/em> This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:16 until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God: This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.","summary_en":"22:16 until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God: This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139081,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:16","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:16<\/strong> <em>until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God:<\/em> This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:16<\/strong> <em>until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God:<\/em> This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:16 until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God: This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.","summary_en":"22:16 until its meaning is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God: This celebration had as its goal the messianic banquet (see 14:1-24). Jesus’ death as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor 5:7) inaugurated the Kingdom of God that will be completed at Jesus’ second coming.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":23484,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56204,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:17","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:17<\/strong> <em>he took a cup of wine:<\/em> The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:17<\/strong> <em>he took a cup of wine:<\/em> The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:17 he took a cup of wine: The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.","summary_en":"22:17 he took a cup of wine: The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83830,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:17","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:17<\/strong> <em>he took a cup of wine:<\/em> The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:17<\/strong> <em>he took a cup of wine:<\/em> The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:17 he took a cup of wine: The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.","summary_en":"22:17 he took a cup of wine: The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111456,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:17","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:17<\/strong> <em>he took a cup of wine:<\/em> The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:17<\/strong> <em>he took a cup of wine:<\/em> The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:17 he took a cup of wine: The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.","summary_en":"22:17 he took a cup of wine: The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139082,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:17","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:17<\/strong> <em>he took a cup of wine:<\/em> The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:17<\/strong> <em>he took a cup of wine:<\/em> The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:17 he took a cup of wine: The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.","summary_en":"22:17 he took a cup of wine: The traditional Passover celebration used four cups of wine—at the opening benediction, after the Passover explanation, after the meal, and after a concluding psalm. This was probably the first cup that introduced the ceremony.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64390,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts","title_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts","content_ro":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","summary_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92016,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts","title_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts","content_ro":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","summary_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119642,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts","title_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts","content_ro":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","summary_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147268,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts","title_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts","content_ro":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","summary_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":23514,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":19547,"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":23491,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25061,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Memorial","title_en":"Memorial","content_ro":"<h3>MEMORIAL<\/h3>\n<p>Something that keeps remembrance vivid. The ideas represented by the words “remember,” “remembrance,” and “memorial” are closely connected in common parlance as well as in biblical usage. The Hebrew and Greek words translated as “memorial” in the OT and NT are nominal derivatives of the verbal roots meaning “to remember.” It is for this reason that one cannot fully grasp the significance of the term “memorial” without first understanding something of the usage and meaning of the term “to remember.”<\/p>\n<p>Although “remember” is usually understood as simply recalling to the mind something from the past, and “memorial” as that which serves to preserve the memory of something from the past, there is often another dimension to these terms in biblical usage. In the Bible, the verb “to remember” often represents a broader idea than simply to recall something from the past because it implies and includes resultant action as well. It is not just recalling, but recalling in a way that affects one’s present feeling, thought, or action. For example, when it is said in Genesis 8:1 that God “remembered Noah,” this does not mean that God merely recalled that Noah was in the ark. It includes this idea to be sure, but more than this it means that God is acting on Noah’s behalf. In a similar way, when Genesis 30:22 says that God “remembered Rachel,” the meaning is that after a long period of barrenness God is going to answer Rachel’s prayer for a child.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most prominent uses of the idea to remember in the OT is the exhortation to the Israelites to remember the mighty acts of the Lord on their behalf in the past (Pss 77:11; 78:7; 105:5). This also means much more than simply recalling events from past history. It means to live in the present in the light of God’s past actions. By drawing consequences for the present from the acts of God in the past, Israel’s faith is to be strengthened for the challenges and difficulties encountered in the present. Israel’s failure to remember in this way repeatedly led to apostasy and disobedience (78:11, 42; 106:7, 13, 21-22).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the usage of the term “memorial” demonstrates that it also often carries this added dimension of meaning. Here one notices in particular its use in connection with the Passover. Exodus 12:14 says that the Passover “shall be for you a memorial day” (<span>rsv<\/span>). It is to be an observance that causes the Israelites to live in the present in the light of God’s past action in delivering them from sin and bondage in Egypt. This is much more than simply recalling the exodus as a historical occurrence.<\/p>\n<p>In a similar way Joshua 4:7 describes setting up a monument of 12 stones in the midst of the Jordan River as a “memorial” to the miraculous provision for Israel’s crossing and entering Canaan. This memorial is to be “for the people of Israel for ever.” It is to remind them of God’s past deliverance so that they may take courage in their present circumstances.<\/p>\n<p>Another usage of the term is found in connection with the “stones of remembrance” attached to the front of the ephod worn by the high priest (Ex 28:12, 29; 39:7). The significance of these stones was that they were to bring the names of the sons of Israel before the Lord. This is not simply in order for the Lord to recall their names but to assure the Israelites of his present concern for their well-being.<\/p>\n<p>The term “memorial” is used with a somewhat different connotation in connection with the grain offering in Leviticus 2:2, 16. The “memorial of the grain offering” is that portion that the priest offers upon the altar. The remainder is used for the sustenance of the priests themselves. The memorial is that which represents the whole: it does not serve just to remind God of the entire offering, but is viewed as an embodiment of it. A memorial in this sense may be viewed as embodying something of that which it represents.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the words “memorial” or “remembrance” occur rather infrequently, but in one instance with particular significance. When Jesus instituted the observance of the Lord’s Supper, the NT counterpart to the OT Passover, he said, “This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance [or memorial] of me” (Lk 22:19). The Lord’s Supper is observed as a remembrance of the suffering and death of Christ. It is much more, however, than simply recalling a historical fact; it is remembering in a way that fills the believer with thanksgiving and determines how he lives and acts in the present.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MEMORIAL<\/h3>\n<p>Something that keeps remembrance vivid. The ideas represented by the words “remember,” “remembrance,” and “memorial” are closely connected in common parlance as well as in biblical usage. The Hebrew and Greek words translated as “memorial” in the OT and NT are nominal derivatives of the verbal roots meaning “to remember.” It is for this reason that one cannot fully grasp the significance of the term “memorial” without first understanding something of the usage and meaning of the term “to remember.”<\/p>\n<p>Although “remember” is usually understood as simply recalling to the mind something from the past, and “memorial” as that which serves to preserve the memory of something from the past, there is often another dimension to these terms in biblical usage. In the Bible, the verb “to remember” often represents a broader idea than simply to recall something from the past because it implies and includes resultant action as well. It is not just recalling, but recalling in a way that affects one’s present feeling, thought, or action. For example, when it is said in Genesis 8:1 that God “remembered Noah,” this does not mean that God merely recalled that Noah was in the ark. It includes this idea to be sure, but more than this it means that God is acting on Noah’s behalf. In a similar way, when Genesis 30:22 says that God “remembered Rachel,” the meaning is that after a long period of barrenness God is going to answer Rachel’s prayer for a child.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most prominent uses of the idea to remember in the OT is the exhortation to the Israelites to remember the mighty acts of the Lord on their behalf in the past (Pss 77:11; 78:7; 105:5). This also means much more than simply recalling events from past history. It means to live in the present in the light of God’s past actions. By drawing consequences for the present from the acts of God in the past, Israel’s faith is to be strengthened for the challenges and difficulties encountered in the present. Israel’s failure to remember in this way repeatedly led to apostasy and disobedience (78:11, 42; 106:7, 13, 21-22).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the usage of the term “memorial” demonstrates that it also often carries this added dimension of meaning. Here one notices in particular its use in connection with the Passover. Exodus 12:14 says that the Passover “shall be for you a memorial day” (<span>rsv<\/span>). It is to be an observance that causes the Israelites to live in the present in the light of God’s past action in delivering them from sin and bondage in Egypt. This is much more than simply recalling the exodus as a historical occurrence.<\/p>\n<p>In a similar way Joshua 4:7 describes setting up a monument of 12 stones in the midst of the Jordan River as a “memorial” to the miraculous provision for Israel’s crossing and entering Canaan. This memorial is to be “for the people of Israel for ever.” It is to remind them of God’s past deliverance so that they may take courage in their present circumstances.<\/p>\n<p>Another usage of the term is found in connection with the “stones of remembrance” attached to the front of the ephod worn by the high priest (Ex 28:12, 29; 39:7). The significance of these stones was that they were to bring the names of the sons of Israel before the Lord. This is not simply in order for the Lord to recall their names but to assure the Israelites of his present concern for their well-being.<\/p>\n<p>The term “memorial” is used with a somewhat different connotation in connection with the grain offering in Leviticus 2:2, 16. The “memorial of the grain offering” is that portion that the priest offers upon the altar. The remainder is used for the sustenance of the priests themselves. The memorial is that which represents the whole: it does not serve just to remind God of the entire offering, but is viewed as an embodiment of it. A memorial in this sense may be viewed as embodying something of that which it represents.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the words “memorial” or “remembrance” occur rather infrequently, but in one instance with particular significance. When Jesus instituted the observance of the Lord’s Supper, the NT counterpart to the OT Passover, he said, “This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance [or memorial] of me” (Lk 22:19). The Lord’s Supper is observed as a remembrance of the suffering and death of Christ. It is much more, however, than simply recalling a historical fact; it is remembering in a way that fills the believer with thanksgiving and determines how he lives and acts in the present.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MEMORIAL Something that keeps remembrance vivid. The ideas represented by the words “remember,” “remembrance,” and “memorial” are closely connected in common parlance as well as in biblical usage. The Hebrew and Greek words translated as “memorial” in the OT and NT are nominal derivatives of the verbal roots meaning “to remember.” It is for this reason that one cannot fully grasp the significance of the term “memorial” without first understanding something of the usage and meaning of the term...","summary_en":"MEMORIAL Something that keeps remembrance vivid. The ideas represented by the words “remember,” “remembrance,” and “memorial” are closely connected in common parlance as well as in biblical usage. The Hebrew and Greek words translated as “memorial” in the OT and NT are nominal derivatives of the verbal roots meaning “to remember.” It is for this reason that one cannot fully grasp the significance of the term “memorial” without first understanding something of the usage and meaning of the term...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39687,"type":"chart","type_label":"Diagramă","type_icon":"📊","type_color":"#3b82f6","title_ro":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments","title_en":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments","content_ro":"<h3>Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments<\/h3>\n<p>For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies.<\/p>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p class=\"td\"\/><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Old Testament Prophecies<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>New Testament Fulfillment<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Micah 5:2<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 2:1-6<\/p><p>Luke 2:1-20<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 7:14<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 1:18-25<\/p><p>Luke 1:26-38<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 7:40<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 4. Messiah was to enter Jerusalem in triumph<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Zechariah 9:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 21:1-9<\/p><p>John 12:12-16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 5. Messiah was to be rejected by his own people<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:1, 3<\/p><p>Psalm 118:22<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:3-4<\/p><p>John 12:37-43<\/p><p>Acts 4:1-12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 6. Messiah was to be betrayed by one of his followers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 41:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:14-16, 47-50<\/p><p>Luke 22:19-23<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 7. Messiah was to be tried and condemned<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Luke 23:1-25<\/p><p>Matthew 27:1-2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 8. Messiah was to be silent before his accusers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:12-14<\/p><p>Mark 15:3-4<\/p><p>Luke 23:8-10<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 9. Messiah was to be struck and spat on by his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 50:6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:67; 27:30<\/p><p>Mark 14:65<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>10. Messiah was to be mocked and insulted<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:7-8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:39-44<\/p><p>Luke 23:11, 35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>11. Messiah was to die by crucifixion<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:14, 16-17<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:31<\/p><p>Mark 15:20, 25<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>12. Messiah was to suffer with criminals and pray for his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:38<\/p><p>Mark 15:27, 28<\/p><p>Luke 23:32-34<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>13. Messiah was to be given vinegar<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 69:21<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:34<\/p><p>John 19:28-30<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>14. Others were to cast lots for Messiah’s garments<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:18<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:35<\/p><p>John 19:23-24<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>15. Messiah’s bones were not to be broken<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Exodus 12:46<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 19:31-36<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>16. Messiah was to die as a sacrifice for sin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:5-6, 8, 10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 1:29; 11:49-52<\/p><p>Acts 10:43; 13:38, 39<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>17. Messiah was to be raised from the dead<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 16:10<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 28:1-10<\/p><p>Acts 2:22-32<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>18. Messiah is now at God’s right hand<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 110:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mark 16:19<\/p><p>Luke 24:50-51<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","content_en":"<h3>Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments<\/h3>\n<p>For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies.<\/p>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p class=\"td\"\/><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Old Testament Prophecies<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>New Testament Fulfillment<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Micah 5:2<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 2:1-6<\/p><p>Luke 2:1-20<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 7:14<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 1:18-25<\/p><p>Luke 1:26-38<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 7:40<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 4. Messiah was to enter Jerusalem in triumph<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Zechariah 9:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 21:1-9<\/p><p>John 12:12-16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 5. Messiah was to be rejected by his own people<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:1, 3<\/p><p>Psalm 118:22<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:3-4<\/p><p>John 12:37-43<\/p><p>Acts 4:1-12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 6. Messiah was to be betrayed by one of his followers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 41:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:14-16, 47-50<\/p><p>Luke 22:19-23<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 7. Messiah was to be tried and condemned<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Luke 23:1-25<\/p><p>Matthew 27:1-2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 8. Messiah was to be silent before his accusers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:12-14<\/p><p>Mark 15:3-4<\/p><p>Luke 23:8-10<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 9. Messiah was to be struck and spat on by his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 50:6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:67; 27:30<\/p><p>Mark 14:65<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>10. Messiah was to be mocked and insulted<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:7-8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:39-44<\/p><p>Luke 23:11, 35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>11. Messiah was to die by crucifixion<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:14, 16-17<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:31<\/p><p>Mark 15:20, 25<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>12. Messiah was to suffer with criminals and pray for his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:38<\/p><p>Mark 15:27, 28<\/p><p>Luke 23:32-34<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>13. Messiah was to be given vinegar<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 69:21<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:34<\/p><p>John 19:28-30<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>14. Others were to cast lots for Messiah’s garments<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:18<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:35<\/p><p>John 19:23-24<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>15. Messiah’s bones were not to be broken<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Exodus 12:46<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 19:31-36<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>16. Messiah was to die as a sacrifice for sin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:5-6, 8, 10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 1:29; 11:49-52<\/p><p>Acts 10:43; 13:38, 39<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>17. Messiah was to be raised from the dead<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 16:10<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 28:1-10<\/p><p>Acts 2:22-32<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>18. Messiah is now at God’s right hand<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 110:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mark 16:19<\/p><p>Luke 24:50-51<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","summary_ro":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies. Old Testament Prophecies New Testament Fulfillment 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1-6Luke 2:1-20 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25Luke 1:26-38 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses Deuterono...","summary_en":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies. Old Testament Prophecies New Testament Fulfillment 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1-6Luke 2:1-20 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25Luke 1:26-38 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses Deuterono...","source":"Charts\/Charts.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56205,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:19","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:19-20<\/strong> Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • <em>This is my body, which is given for you:<\/em> The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:19-20<\/strong> Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • <em>This is my body, which is given for you:<\/em> The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:19-20 Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • This is my body, which is given for you: The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).","summary_en":"22:19-20 Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • This is my body, which is given for you: The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83831,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:19","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:19-20<\/strong> Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • <em>This is my body, which is given for you:<\/em> The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:19-20<\/strong> Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • <em>This is my body, which is given for you:<\/em> The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:19-20 Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • This is my body, which is given for you: The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).","summary_en":"22:19-20 Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • This is my body, which is given for you: The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111457,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:19","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:19-20<\/strong> Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • <em>This is my body, which is given for you:<\/em> The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:19-20<\/strong> Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • <em>This is my body, which is given for you:<\/em> The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:19-20 Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • This is my body, which is given for you: The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).","summary_en":"22:19-20 Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • This is my body, which is given for you: The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139083,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:19","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:19-20<\/strong> Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • <em>This is my body, which is given for you:<\/em> The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:19-20<\/strong> Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • <em>This is my body, which is given for you:<\/em> The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:19-20 Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • This is my body, which is given for you: The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).","summary_en":"22:19-20 Using the bread and cup as symbols of his body and blood, Jesus instituted the communion service that the disciples were to practice in remembrance of his death. • This is my body, which is given for you: The unleavened bread of the Passover symbolized Jesus’ death as the Passover lamb. His death would pay for the sins of the world (cp. 1 Cor 11:24-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67141,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94767,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122393,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150019,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":41907,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69533,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97159,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124785,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":3187,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Atonement","title_en":"Atonement","content_ro":"<h3>ATONEMENT<\/h3>\n<p>In Christian thought, the act by which God and man are brought together in personal relationship. The term is derived from Anglo-Saxon words meaning “making at one,” hence “at-one-ment.” It presupposes a separation or alienation that needs to be overcome if human beings are to know God and have fellowship with him. As a term expressing relationship, atonement is tied closely to such terms as reconciliation and forgiveness.<\/p>\n<p>In the <span>kjv<\/span> the word “atonement” occurs many times in the OT but only once in the NT (Rom 5:11). Modern translations generally, and more correctly, render the word “reconciliation.” The idea of atonement is ever present in the NT, however, and is one of the fundamental concepts of Scripture. God is seen as taking the initiative in man’s salvation; thus atonement is the work of God, who opens the possibility for sinful human beings to receive pardoning grace. For the sinner, who cannot know God, who cannot bridge the gap between himself and God, a “new and living way” is opened up by God.<\/p>\n<p>The need for atonement is bound up with man’s thoroughgoing sinfulness. All of Scripture (cited below from the <span>rsv<\/span> unless otherwise noted) points to the radical nature of that sinfulness. The prophet Isaiah affirmed, “All we like sheep have gone astray” (Is 53:6). According to another prophet, Jeremiah, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?” (Jer 17:9). David the psalmist cried, “There is none that does good, no, not one” (Ps 14:3). Paul described the degeneracy of man caused by his disobedience and idolatry (Rom 1:18-32) and summed it up: “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23). Elsewhere Paul described men as enemies of God (Rom 5:10), as “hostile to God” (Rom 8:7), as “estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds” (Col 1:21). Adam’s race is just like Adam: “Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned” (Rom 5:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>The problem of the sinfulness of humanity is compounded by the holiness of God, who cannot look upon sin. Isaiah saw the holy God in the temple and drew back because of his own sinfulness (Is 6:1-5). Not only is man terribly sinful, but God is fearfully holy. Consequently man dreads God and can do nothing to change this situation. He is lost, helpless, standing under the awful judgment of God. He cannot justify himself before God and cannot merit God’s concern. The possibility of atonement, then, rests entirely with God. The nature of that atonement, as illustrated in biblical history, affirms simultaneously the nature of both God and man.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew term frequently translated “atone” has the basic meaning “to wipe out,” “to erase, “to cover,” or perhaps more generally “to remove.” In the <span>kjv<\/span> it is translated by such expressions as “to make atonement,” “forgive,” “appease,” “pacify,” “pardon,” “purge,” “put off,” and “reconcile.”<\/p>\n<p>The most common OT expression of the means of atonement was the sacrifice and offering up of the blood of a victim. In a sacrifice the shedding of blood was the central act. Life was in the blood (Lv 17:11); in the pouring out of the blood, life was given up; that is, death occurred. Elsewhere blood may be a symbol for life, but in the sacrificial motif it symbolized death. Some scholars have argued that in the pouring forth of the blood, life was made available to the people. It was the life <em>of the flesh,<\/em> however, that was in the blood, and the flesh was sacrificed. In the NT it is by virtue of the resurrection that the life of Christ is made available to believers.<\/p>\n<p>Not every OT mention of atonement referred directly to the shedding of blood. On the Day of Atonement one of two goats was slain, but the other was “presented alive before the Lord to make atonement” (Lv 16:10). That “scapegoat” was driven out into the wilderness bearing the sins of the people. Banishment or expulsion took the place of blood as the goat, bearing the sins of the people, suffered the fate of the sinner. The goat was a substitute for the people. Money offered for the temple was also said to make atonement (Ex 30:16). In another text Aaron and Moses prevented the spreading of a plague by carrying incense: “He put on the incense, and made atonement for the people” (Nm 16:47). Those few special expressions do not undo the basic OT theme of atonement through provision of a substitute animal. The NT summarizes that theme by saying that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” (Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n<p>From atonement for sin in the OT came such terms as “expiation” and “forgiveness.” From the idea of atonement for the wrath or judgment of God came “propitiation” and “reconciliation.” Hence in modern English translations various terms attempt to express the concept of atonement provided by God.<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the NT it is made clear that the work of Christ, primarily the cross, is what provides atonement. OT language continues to find expression in the NT, especially the term “blood.” Thus in the NT we have the “blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:28) and the “new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20) as well as the “blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13) and the “blood of his cross” (Col 1:20). Almost equivalent are the frequent references to the cross and the death of Christ. The NT is the “new covenant” of Jesus Christ, sealed by his blood.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Propitiation; Expiation; Offerings and Sacrifices; Atonement, Day of; Redeemer, Redemption; Ransom.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ATONEMENT<\/h3>\n<p>In Christian thought, the act by which God and man are brought together in personal relationship. The term is derived from Anglo-Saxon words meaning “making at one,” hence “at-one-ment.” It presupposes a separation or alienation that needs to be overcome if human beings are to know God and have fellowship with him. As a term expressing relationship, atonement is tied closely to such terms as reconciliation and forgiveness.<\/p>\n<p>In the <span>kjv<\/span> the word “atonement” occurs many times in the OT but only once in the NT (Rom 5:11). Modern translations generally, and more correctly, render the word “reconciliation.” The idea of atonement is ever present in the NT, however, and is one of the fundamental concepts of Scripture. God is seen as taking the initiative in man’s salvation; thus atonement is the work of God, who opens the possibility for sinful human beings to receive pardoning grace. For the sinner, who cannot know God, who cannot bridge the gap between himself and God, a “new and living way” is opened up by God.<\/p>\n<p>The need for atonement is bound up with man’s thoroughgoing sinfulness. All of Scripture (cited below from the <span>rsv<\/span> unless otherwise noted) points to the radical nature of that sinfulness. The prophet Isaiah affirmed, “All we like sheep have gone astray” (Is 53:6). According to another prophet, Jeremiah, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?” (Jer 17:9). David the psalmist cried, “There is none that does good, no, not one” (Ps 14:3). Paul described the degeneracy of man caused by his disobedience and idolatry (Rom 1:18-32) and summed it up: “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23). Elsewhere Paul described men as enemies of God (Rom 5:10), as “hostile to God” (Rom 8:7), as “estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds” (Col 1:21). Adam’s race is just like Adam: “Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned” (Rom 5:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>The problem of the sinfulness of humanity is compounded by the holiness of God, who cannot look upon sin. Isaiah saw the holy God in the temple and drew back because of his own sinfulness (Is 6:1-5). Not only is man terribly sinful, but God is fearfully holy. Consequently man dreads God and can do nothing to change this situation. He is lost, helpless, standing under the awful judgment of God. He cannot justify himself before God and cannot merit God’s concern. The possibility of atonement, then, rests entirely with God. The nature of that atonement, as illustrated in biblical history, affirms simultaneously the nature of both God and man.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew term frequently translated “atone” has the basic meaning “to wipe out,” “to erase, “to cover,” or perhaps more generally “to remove.” In the <span>kjv<\/span> it is translated by such expressions as “to make atonement,” “forgive,” “appease,” “pacify,” “pardon,” “purge,” “put off,” and “reconcile.”<\/p>\n<p>The most common OT expression of the means of atonement was the sacrifice and offering up of the blood of a victim. In a sacrifice the shedding of blood was the central act. Life was in the blood (Lv 17:11); in the pouring out of the blood, life was given up; that is, death occurred. Elsewhere blood may be a symbol for life, but in the sacrificial motif it symbolized death. Some scholars have argued that in the pouring forth of the blood, life was made available to the people. It was the life <em>of the flesh,<\/em> however, that was in the blood, and the flesh was sacrificed. In the NT it is by virtue of the resurrection that the life of Christ is made available to believers.<\/p>\n<p>Not every OT mention of atonement referred directly to the shedding of blood. On the Day of Atonement one of two goats was slain, but the other was “presented alive before the Lord to make atonement” (Lv 16:10). That “scapegoat” was driven out into the wilderness bearing the sins of the people. Banishment or expulsion took the place of blood as the goat, bearing the sins of the people, suffered the fate of the sinner. The goat was a substitute for the people. Money offered for the temple was also said to make atonement (Ex 30:16). In another text Aaron and Moses prevented the spreading of a plague by carrying incense: “He put on the incense, and made atonement for the people” (Nm 16:47). Those few special expressions do not undo the basic OT theme of atonement through provision of a substitute animal. The NT summarizes that theme by saying that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” (Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n<p>From atonement for sin in the OT came such terms as “expiation” and “forgiveness.” From the idea of atonement for the wrath or judgment of God came “propitiation” and “reconciliation.” Hence in modern English translations various terms attempt to express the concept of atonement provided by God.<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the NT it is made clear that the work of Christ, primarily the cross, is what provides atonement. OT language continues to find expression in the NT, especially the term “blood.” Thus in the NT we have the “blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:28) and the “new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20) as well as the “blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13) and the “blood of his cross” (Col 1:20). Almost equivalent are the frequent references to the cross and the death of Christ. The NT is the “new covenant” of Jesus Christ, sealed by his blood.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Propitiation; Expiation; Offerings and Sacrifices; Atonement, Day of; Redeemer, Redemption; Ransom.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ATONEMENT In Christian thought, the act by which God and man are brought together in personal relationship. The term is derived from Anglo-Saxon words meaning “making at one,” hence “at-one-ment.” It presupposes a separation or alienation that needs to be overcome if human beings are to know God and have fellowship with him. As a term expressing relationship, atonement is tied closely to such terms as reconciliation and forgiveness. In the kjv the word “atonement” occurs many times in the OT ...","summary_en":"ATONEMENT In Christian thought, the act by which God and man are brought together in personal relationship. The term is derived from Anglo-Saxon words meaning “making at one,” hence “at-one-ment.” It presupposes a separation or alienation that needs to be overcome if human beings are to know God and have fellowship with him. As a term expressing relationship, atonement is tied closely to such terms as reconciliation and forgiveness. In the kjv the word “atonement” occurs many times in the OT ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4627,"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":5260,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blood","title_en":"Blood","content_ro":"<h3>BLOOD<\/h3>\n<p>Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>; see also 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12). After betraying Jesus, Judas recognized that he had “sinned in betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). In such passages “blood” has reference to life lived at the human level, natural life as opposed to spiritual or divine life.<\/p>\n<p>The term “blood” is also used in the sense of shedding blood, that is, in killing or murder. Psalm 9:12 speaks of one “who avenges blood.” Genesis 37:26 refers to the brothers who concealed Joseph’s blood, that is, his murder. To be “burdened with the blood of another” (Prv 28:17, <span>rsv<\/span>) means to be guilty of murder. At the crucifixion Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this man” (Mt 27:24-25). Thus, the idea of violent death is regularly connected with blood.<\/p>\n<p>The logic of such expressions becomes particularly clear when one sees how closely life is associated with blood. Three passages specifically tie the two together. “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gn 9:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lv 17:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). “The only restriction is never to eat the blood, for the blood is the life” (Dt 12:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Because God is the author of all life, any shedding of blood (any killing) is a serious matter. A certain sanctity associated with blood forms the basis for prohibitions against eating it. (Compare what the apostles said in Acts 15:20.) Blood stands for the “life principle” that is from God.<\/p>\n<p>Because of its association with life, blood takes on a special significance in the sacrificial motif. On the Day of Atonement (Lv 16), the blood of a bull and of a goat was sprinkled upon the altar as a “covering” of the people’s sin. Life was poured out in death. Animal life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment and atonement were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Transference is depicted also by the scapegoat in the same ceremony (Lv 16:20-22). In the first Passover (Ex 12:1-13), the blood bore the same meaning. Animal blood posted on each door was a sign that a death had already taken place, so the angel of death passed over.<\/p>\n<p>Further, because life is connected with blood, blood becomes the supreme offering to God. In the ratification of the covenant (Ex 24), Moses poured half the sacrificial blood on the altar; after reading the covenant to the people and receiving their affirmative response, he sprinkled the rest of the blood on them and said, “This blood confirms the covenant the <span>Lord<\/span> has made with you in giving you these laws” (Ex 24:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sprinkling blood on both the altar and the people bound God and the Israelites together in covenant relationship. In the sacrifices of Israel, blood stood for death and depending on the context, might also stand for judgment, sacrifice, substitution, or redemption. Life with God was made possible by blood.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, apart from medical references (e.g., Mt 9:20) and references to murder (e.g., Acts 22:20), the primary reference is to the blood of Christ, an allusion to the OT motifs. The synoptic Gospels show that at the Last Supper Jesus spoke of his blood with reference to a new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). The language surrounding those sayings reveals the sacrificial motif; Jesus was speaking of his death and its redemptive significance. The fourth Gospel expresses the same theology in different terms and in a different context: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you” (Jn 6:53, <span>nlt<\/span>). The believer is said to participate by faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord (see also 1 Cor 10:16).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul’s letters likewise associate blood with Christ’s death, so much so that the word becomes—like the term “cross”—synonymous with the death of Christ in its saving significance: making peace “by means of his blood on the cross” (Col 1:20, <span>nlt<\/span>); and in a passage on reconciliation: “though you once were far away from God, now you have been brought near to him because of the blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). “Blood” and “cross” both stand for the death of Jesus in reconciling Jew and Gentile to God and in the creation of a new humanity. Paul evidently had in mind the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement when he said that God purposed that Christ be an atoning sacrifice by his blood (Rom 3:25). His vocabulary (from Lv 16) focused on the most important sacrifice of Jewish tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Peter made reference to the blood of the covenant (Ex 24) when he described Christian exiles as having been sprinkled with the blood of Christ (1 Pt 1:2). He reminded his readers that they had been redeemed by that blood (v 19). In calling Christ the “spotless lamb of God,” he may have had in mind either the servant of Isaiah 53 or the Passover lamb, both of which had redemptive significance in his readers’ minds. Finally, to the writer of Hebrews the whole OT system of sacrifices found its ultimate fulfillment in the blood of Christ, that is, in his sacrificial death (Heb 9:7-28; 13:11-12).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, NT references to the blood of Christ point to the culminating and comprehensive redemption achieved by God in the death of his Son (Heb 10:20). Both justice and justification were thus achieved (Rom 3:26). The blood of Christ is therefore called the “once for all” means of redemption (Heb 9:26). <em>See<\/em> Atonement; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLOOD<\/h3>\n<p>Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>; see also 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12). After betraying Jesus, Judas recognized that he had “sinned in betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). In such passages “blood” has reference to life lived at the human level, natural life as opposed to spiritual or divine life.<\/p>\n<p>The term “blood” is also used in the sense of shedding blood, that is, in killing or murder. Psalm 9:12 speaks of one “who avenges blood.” Genesis 37:26 refers to the brothers who concealed Joseph’s blood, that is, his murder. To be “burdened with the blood of another” (Prv 28:17, <span>rsv<\/span>) means to be guilty of murder. At the crucifixion Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this man” (Mt 27:24-25). Thus, the idea of violent death is regularly connected with blood.<\/p>\n<p>The logic of such expressions becomes particularly clear when one sees how closely life is associated with blood. Three passages specifically tie the two together. “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gn 9:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lv 17:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). “The only restriction is never to eat the blood, for the blood is the life” (Dt 12:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Because God is the author of all life, any shedding of blood (any killing) is a serious matter. A certain sanctity associated with blood forms the basis for prohibitions against eating it. (Compare what the apostles said in Acts 15:20.) Blood stands for the “life principle” that is from God.<\/p>\n<p>Because of its association with life, blood takes on a special significance in the sacrificial motif. On the Day of Atonement (Lv 16), the blood of a bull and of a goat was sprinkled upon the altar as a “covering” of the people’s sin. Life was poured out in death. Animal life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment and atonement were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Transference is depicted also by the scapegoat in the same ceremony (Lv 16:20-22). In the first Passover (Ex 12:1-13), the blood bore the same meaning. Animal blood posted on each door was a sign that a death had already taken place, so the angel of death passed over.<\/p>\n<p>Further, because life is connected with blood, blood becomes the supreme offering to God. In the ratification of the covenant (Ex 24), Moses poured half the sacrificial blood on the altar; after reading the covenant to the people and receiving their affirmative response, he sprinkled the rest of the blood on them and said, “This blood confirms the covenant the <span>Lord<\/span> has made with you in giving you these laws” (Ex 24:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sprinkling blood on both the altar and the people bound God and the Israelites together in covenant relationship. In the sacrifices of Israel, blood stood for death and depending on the context, might also stand for judgment, sacrifice, substitution, or redemption. Life with God was made possible by blood.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, apart from medical references (e.g., Mt 9:20) and references to murder (e.g., Acts 22:20), the primary reference is to the blood of Christ, an allusion to the OT motifs. The synoptic Gospels show that at the Last Supper Jesus spoke of his blood with reference to a new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). The language surrounding those sayings reveals the sacrificial motif; Jesus was speaking of his death and its redemptive significance. The fourth Gospel expresses the same theology in different terms and in a different context: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you” (Jn 6:53, <span>nlt<\/span>). The believer is said to participate by faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord (see also 1 Cor 10:16).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul’s letters likewise associate blood with Christ’s death, so much so that the word becomes—like the term “cross”—synonymous with the death of Christ in its saving significance: making peace “by means of his blood on the cross” (Col 1:20, <span>nlt<\/span>); and in a passage on reconciliation: “though you once were far away from God, now you have been brought near to him because of the blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). “Blood” and “cross” both stand for the death of Jesus in reconciling Jew and Gentile to God and in the creation of a new humanity. Paul evidently had in mind the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement when he said that God purposed that Christ be an atoning sacrifice by his blood (Rom 3:25). His vocabulary (from Lv 16) focused on the most important sacrifice of Jewish tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Peter made reference to the blood of the covenant (Ex 24) when he described Christian exiles as having been sprinkled with the blood of Christ (1 Pt 1:2). He reminded his readers that they had been redeemed by that blood (v 19). In calling Christ the “spotless lamb of God,” he may have had in mind either the servant of Isaiah 53 or the Passover lamb, both of which had redemptive significance in his readers’ minds. Finally, to the writer of Hebrews the whole OT system of sacrifices found its ultimate fulfillment in the blood of Christ, that is, in his sacrificial death (Heb 9:7-28; 13:11-12).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, NT references to the blood of Christ point to the culminating and comprehensive redemption achieved by God in the death of his Son (Heb 10:20). Both justice and justification were thus achieved (Rom 3:26). The blood of Christ is therefore called the “once for all” means of redemption (Heb 9:26). <em>See<\/em> Atonement; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLOOD Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not reve...","summary_en":"BLOOD Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not reve...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5421,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Body of Christ","title_en":"Body of Christ","content_ro":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","summary_en":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7253,"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":7888,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant","title_en":"Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\n<p>At a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<p>• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofCovenant\">The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HumanCovenants\">Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>A variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\n<p>To appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\n<p>An individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\n<p>Covenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Divine-HumanCovenants\">Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>The same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BeginningsoftheCovenantTradition\">Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\n<p>Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\n<p>The fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Formal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the <span>Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the <span>Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<p>God’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\n<p>Another dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSinaiCovenant\">The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\n<p>The basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\n<p>God’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\n<p>The second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 <span>BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCovenantwithDavid\">The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>The covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Christians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 <span>BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCovenantPredictedintheOldTestament\">The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 <span>BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the <span>Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\n<p>At a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<p>• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofCovenant\">The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HumanCovenants\">Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>A variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\n<p>To appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\n<p>An individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\n<p>Covenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Divine-HumanCovenants\">Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>The same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BeginningsoftheCovenantTradition\">Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\n<p>Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\n<p>The fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Formal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the <span>Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the <span>Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<p>God’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\n<p>Another dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSinaiCovenant\">The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\n<p>The basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\n<p>God’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\n<p>The second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 <span>BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCovenantwithDavid\">The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>The covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Christians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 <span>BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCovenantPredictedintheOldTestament\">The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 <span>BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the <span>Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","summary_en":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7920,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant, the New","title_en":"Covenant, the New","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\n<p>A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, <span>rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>A second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ANewCovenant\">A New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\n<p>Even though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\n<p>In his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SuperiorityoftheNewCovenant\">Superiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n<p>1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\n<p>A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, <span>rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>A second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ANewCovenant\">A New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\n<p>Even though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\n<p>In his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SuperiorityoftheNewCovenant\">Superiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n<p>1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","summary_en":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23503,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27426,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"New Covenant","title_en":"New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>NEW COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Expression used by Jesus (Lk 22:20; cf. Jer 31:31) to designate the meaning of his death. <em>See<\/em> Covenant, The New.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEW COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Expression used by Jesus (Lk 22:20; cf. Jer 31:31) to designate the meaning of his death. <em>See<\/em> Covenant, The New.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEW COVENANT Expression used by Jesus (Lk 22:20; cf. Jer 31:31) to designate the meaning of his death. See Covenant, The New.","summary_en":"NEW COVENANT Expression used by Jesus (Lk 22:20; cf. Jer 31:31) to designate the meaning of his death. See Covenant, The New.","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37129,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Testament*","title_en":"Testament*","content_ro":"<h3>TESTAMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>English word translated from the Greek signifying the covenantal administrations of God. Prior to Christ, this covenant is known as the Old Testament; under Christ’s administration, it is called the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word, generally meaning “last will and testament,” contains certain legal characteristics that have important theological implications. First, a testament was not an agreement between parties (especially equals) but rather was exercised solely by the testator. Second, the testament became effective upon the death of the testator. Third, the testament was irrevocable.<\/p>\n<p>When the OT was translated into Greek, the translators had the option of two words to translate the Hebrew word for “covenant.” One term carries the idea of a mutual agreement, and this often between equals. Since this would blur the divine initiative in God’s covenantal dealings with the patriarchs and with Israel, the other word was used. It connoted the self-determined action of the sovereign in making the covenant. The NT writers saw additional significance in the word “testament.” As a testament only becomes valid at the death of the testator, so the benefits of the new covenant are given to believers as a consequence of Christ’s death (Heb 9:15-22; cf. 1 Cor 11:25; Lk 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; Covenant, The New.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TESTAMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>English word translated from the Greek signifying the covenantal administrations of God. Prior to Christ, this covenant is known as the Old Testament; under Christ’s administration, it is called the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word, generally meaning “last will and testament,” contains certain legal characteristics that have important theological implications. First, a testament was not an agreement between parties (especially equals) but rather was exercised solely by the testator. Second, the testament became effective upon the death of the testator. Third, the testament was irrevocable.<\/p>\n<p>When the OT was translated into Greek, the translators had the option of two words to translate the Hebrew word for “covenant.” One term carries the idea of a mutual agreement, and this often between equals. Since this would blur the divine initiative in God’s covenantal dealings with the patriarchs and with Israel, the other word was used. It connoted the self-determined action of the sovereign in making the covenant. The NT writers saw additional significance in the word “testament.” As a testament only becomes valid at the death of the testator, so the benefits of the new covenant are given to believers as a consequence of Christ’s death (Heb 9:15-22; cf. 1 Cor 11:25; Lk 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; Covenant, The New.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TESTAMENT* English word translated from the Greek signifying the covenantal administrations of God. Prior to Christ, this covenant is known as the Old Testament; under Christ’s administration, it is called the New Testament. The Greek word, generally meaning “last will and testament,” contains certain legal characteristics that have important theological implications. First, a testament was not an agreement between parties (especially equals) but rather was exercised solely by the testator. S...","summary_en":"TESTAMENT* English word translated from the Greek signifying the covenantal administrations of God. Prior to Christ, this covenant is known as the Old Testament; under Christ’s administration, it is called the New Testament. The Greek word, generally meaning “last will and testament,” contains certain legal characteristics that have important theological implications. First, a testament was not an agreement between parties (especially equals) but rather was exercised solely by the testator. S...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56206,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:20","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:20<\/strong> God’s covenants in the Old Testament were <em>confirmed<\/em> with the <em>blood<\/em> of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the <em>new covenant<\/em> that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:20<\/strong> God’s covenants in the Old Testament were <em>confirmed<\/em> with the <em>blood<\/em> of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the <em>new covenant<\/em> that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:20 God’s covenants in the Old Testament were confirmed with the blood of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the new covenant that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).","summary_en":"22:20 God’s covenants in the Old Testament were confirmed with the blood of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the new covenant that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83832,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:20","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:20<\/strong> God’s covenants in the Old Testament were <em>confirmed<\/em> with the <em>blood<\/em> of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the <em>new covenant<\/em> that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:20<\/strong> God’s covenants in the Old Testament were <em>confirmed<\/em> with the <em>blood<\/em> of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the <em>new covenant<\/em> that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:20 God’s covenants in the Old Testament were confirmed with the blood of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the new covenant that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).","summary_en":"22:20 God’s covenants in the Old Testament were confirmed with the blood of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the new covenant that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111458,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:20","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:20<\/strong> God’s covenants in the Old Testament were <em>confirmed<\/em> with the <em>blood<\/em> of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the <em>new covenant<\/em> that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:20<\/strong> God’s covenants in the Old Testament were <em>confirmed<\/em> with the <em>blood<\/em> of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the <em>new covenant<\/em> that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:20 God’s covenants in the Old Testament were confirmed with the blood of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the new covenant that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).","summary_en":"22:20 God’s covenants in the Old Testament were confirmed with the blood of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the new covenant that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139084,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:20","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:20<\/strong> God’s covenants in the Old Testament were <em>confirmed<\/em> with the <em>blood<\/em> of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the <em>new covenant<\/em> that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:20<\/strong> God’s covenants in the Old Testament were <em>confirmed<\/em> with the <em>blood<\/em> of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the <em>new covenant<\/em> that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:20 God’s covenants in the Old Testament were confirmed with the blood of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the new covenant that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).","summary_en":"22:20 God’s covenants in the Old Testament were confirmed with the blood of a sacrifice (Gen 15:9-10; Exod 24:8). Jesus’ death established the new covenant that God had promised his people (Jer 31:31-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":59845,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenants","title_en":"God’s Covenants","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\n<p><em>Covenant<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\n<p>God later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>God later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\n<p>Years later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\n<p><em>Covenant<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\n<p>God later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>God later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\n<p>Years later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","summary_en":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60871,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant Love","title_en":"God’s Covenant Love","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64290,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67166,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87471,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenants","title_en":"God’s Covenants","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\n<p><em>Covenant<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\n<p>God later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>God later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\n<p>Years later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\n<p><em>Covenant<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\n<p>God later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>God later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\n<p>Years later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","summary_en":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88497,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant Love","title_en":"God’s Covenant Love","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91916,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94792,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115097,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenants","title_en":"God’s Covenants","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\n<p><em>Covenant<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\n<p>God later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>God later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\n<p>Years later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\n<p><em>Covenant<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\n<p>God later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>God later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\n<p>Years later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","summary_en":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116123,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant Love","title_en":"God’s Covenant Love","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119542,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122418,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142723,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenants","title_en":"God’s Covenants","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\n<p><em>Covenant<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\n<p>God later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>God later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\n<p>Years later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\n<p><em>Covenant<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\n<p>God later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>God later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\n<p>Years later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","summary_en":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143749,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant Love","title_en":"God’s Covenant Love","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant Love<\/h3>\n<p>Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people.<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection in exchange for their loyal service. Similarly, God chose Israel to be his servant nation not because the Israelites deserved it but because he loved them (Deut 7:6-11). Put another way, he loved them because he had chosen them. The strongest affirmation of God’s love-choice can be found in Malachi 1:2-3: God chose Jacob but rejected Esau (see also Rom 9:13-26).<\/p>\n<p>The special covenantal relationship that God had with Israel was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles through Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1–11:18; Eph 2:11-22). This new covenant was established through the ultimate demonstration of God’s love in the suffering and death of his son (Luke 22:20; John 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:6-11; 33:3; Isa 49:14-18; Hos 11:1-11; Mal 1:2-3; Matt 3:16-17; Luke 15:1-32; John 3:16; 16:25-27; Rom 5:6-8; 9:13-26; Eph 1:4; 2:4-7; Heb 12:6-11; 1 Jn 3:1; 4:8-9, 16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant Love Often in the Bible, God’s love is understood in the ordinary sense that God has strongly affectionate feelings toward humankind. In certain contexts, however, such as the covenant document of Deuteronomy, love refers to God’s commitment to his people. In the ancient Near East, a conquering king would characteristically speak of his relationship to vassal peoples in terms of love, meaning that he had chosen those people to enjoy his favor and to benefit from his protection ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147168,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150044,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":12972,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Furniture","title_en":"Furniture","content_ro":"<h3>FURNITURE<\/h3>\n<p>Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinOldTestamentTimes\">Palestine in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references to beds in the OT, using at least three Hebrew nouns. Jacob is pictured as sitting up in bed (Gn 48:2) and as dying on his bed (49:33). Moses threatened that frogs would invade the bedroom and bed of the Egyptian pharaoh (Ex 8:3). Michal, Saul’s daughter, placed an effigy in David’s bed (1 Sm 19:11-17) when Saul sent messengers to capture him there. King David condemned the practice of killing a defenseless person sleeping in bed (2 Sm 4:7, 11). The prophet Elijah laid a dead boy on his bed and revived him (1 Kgs 17:19).<\/p>\n<p>King Ahab sulked on his bed (1 Kgs 21:4), and King Ahaziah lay on his sick bed (2 Kgs 1:4-6, 16). The prophet Amos criticized the rich who lay on beds of ivory and stretched out on their couches (Am 6:4). The prophet Ezekiel spoke symbolically of disobedient Jerusalem as a prostitute sitting on a stately couch with the Lord’s incense and oil on a table nearby (Ez 23:41). Isaiah promised that the righteous would rest in their beds (Is 57:2) and also spoke of the unrighteous setting their beds among false worshipers (vv 7-8). The psalmist flooded his bed with tears (Ps 6:6), and Proverbs refers to a sluggard on his bed (Prv 26:14).<\/p>\n<p>“Table” in the OT refers both to the temple table for the bread of the Presence and to the table used in the palace or home for meals or banquets. King Adoni-bezek had his captives scrambling for scraps under his table (Jgs 1:7). Jonathan’s disabled son Mephibosheth was allowed to sit at David’s table (2 Sm 9:7, 10-13; 19:28). Solomon’s table is described several times (1 Kgs 2:7; 4:27). The queen of Sheba was particularly impressed by the food and table service in Solomon’s palace (10:5). The prophets frequently refer to tables (Is 21:5; 28:8; 65:11; Ez 40:39-43). The few references to chairs describe people reclining at meals and indicate couches rather than actual chairs (Am 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous mentions of thrones, including those of the pharaoh (Gn 41:40; Ex 11:5), David (2 Sm 3:10; 7:13), Solomon (1 Kgs 10:18), the kings of Israel and Judah (1 Kgs 22:10), and God (1 Kgs 22:19; Pss 9:4, 7; 11:4; 93:2). The OT writers sometimes indicate thrones decorated with ivory (1 Kgs 10:18).<\/p>\n<p>The exact character of furniture in Palestine is difficult to determine. Bas-reliefs and wall paintings are more common among Israel’s neighbors. Excavations in Jericho, however, have unearthed some valuable archaeological clues. Tombs of the middle Bronze Age produced reasonably well-preserved tables, stools, and boxes, making possible a study of ancient joinery methods. A variety of small trinket boxes show evidence of bone inlay and incised decoration. Some large slabs of timber may have been beds. Although primarily Canaanite styles, the furniture reflects the household furniture used in Israel in the centuries to follow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GreekandRoman\">Greek and Roman<\/p>\n<p>Historians are quite informed about Greek furniture because of the abundance of decorated vases, bas-reliefs, bronze and terra-cotta statuettes, and literary descriptions. That archaeological evidence indicates that Greek furniture was influenced by preceding civilizations. The picture is generally one of comparative simplicity, far removed from the cluttered and crowded rooms of later civilizations.<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks made several types of seats: (1) the throne, often with a back, legs of various shapes, and armrests; (2) the lighter curved-back chair with arm supports; (3) the four-legged stool; (4) the folding stool with crossed legs traceable to Egyptian models; and (5) the bench. Representations that regularly appear on monuments dating from the eighth to the second century <span>BC<\/span> link Greek chairs to Egyptian and Assyrian prototypes.<\/p>\n<p>Greeks used couches for sleeping and for reclining at meals. Footstools were used to rest the feet or as a step up to higher couches. Like chair legs, couch legs varied in style. Some were carved in the shape of animal legs, some were turned, some were rectangular. From about the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, the legs projected above the frame. Such projections later became headboards and footboards. In Hellenistic times these headrests and footrests were carved and carried bronze medallions in high relief depicting children, satyrs, and animals. Turned legs replaced the rectangular ones. Couches were normally in wood, although bronze and marble couches are known.<\/p>\n<p>Tables were used during meals to hold dishes and food and were removed after the meal. They were made of wood, bronze, and marble and normally had four legs, but three-legged tables were occasionally used. Chests, large and small, served to store clothes, jewelry, and other articles. They were normally of wood, although some were bronze.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rome\">Rome<\/p>\n<p>Roman furniture continued many Greek patterns. The eruption of the volcano Vesuvius in <span>AD<\/span> 79 preserved actual pieces of Roman furniture in its lava flow.<\/p>\n<p>Chairs with backs were heavier than their Greek counterparts and widely used. There were several types of stools: the folding stool, mostly wooden, though sometimes metal; and a newly developed decorative stool, often of bronze, that was supported by four curved legs ornamented with scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>A variety of couches were in use. Some followed Greek models, but others were of Roman invention. Excellent examples of bronze bed frames have been preserved. Presumably, interlaced strips of leather or cords were stretched crisscross on the frame. Gold, silver, tortoiseshell, bone, and ivory decoration were used along with veneer work in rare timber. Later, couches in Italy and in other lands had high backs and sides. The Romans seem to have used tables more widely than Greeks. They appear often as permanent supports for vases and other possessions. Tables were normally rectangular with four legs, but table makers also constructed some with three legs, or even resting on a single support. Round tabletops and legs of animals became popular from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> on. Plain, undecorated wooden tables and benches were used in kitchens and workshops. Outdoor tables were usually of marble with carved animal legs or decorative figures of animals and monsters.<\/p>\n<p>There were various chests and boxes in daily use. Shelves and cupboards became much more popular than in Greek times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinNewTestamentTimes\">Palestine in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The nature of furniture in the NT is probably best understood in relation to contemporaneous Roman models. The NT refers to beds in several passages. People brought a paralytic lying on his bed to Jesus (Mt 9:2, 6; Lk 5:18). When the apostles went into Solomon’s portico, people brought the sick to them on beds (Acts 5:15). A Syro-Phoenician woman’s sick child lay on a bed (Mk 7:30). Jesus spoke of setting a lamp on a stand and not placing it under a bed (Mk 4:21; Lk 8:16), and described what would happen to people in bed when the Day of the Lord came (Lk 17:34). In another parable Jesus spoke of a needy person begging for bread at midnight from a friend who was already in bed with his family (Lk 11:7). Beds of the poor and sick were probably only pallets or mattresses (Mk 6:55; Jn 5:8). When people reclined at meals, they would have been lying on a couch (Jn 13:23).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous NT references to tables. Jesus mentioned crumbs falling from a rich man’s table (Mt 15:27; Mk 7:28; Lk 16:21). Jesus overthrew the money changers’ tables in the temple (Mt 21:12; Mk 11:15). Jesus sat with his disciples at a table for the Passover meal (Lk 22:21) and promised his disciples that they would sit at his table in God’s kingdom. The apostles were relieved of serving tables in order to preach (Acts 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>The household lamp is referred to a number of times (Mt 25:1; Mk 4:21). Terra-cotta domestic lamps have been found in abundance in excavations.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FURNITURE<\/h3>\n<p>Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinOldTestamentTimes\">Palestine in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references to beds in the OT, using at least three Hebrew nouns. Jacob is pictured as sitting up in bed (Gn 48:2) and as dying on his bed (49:33). Moses threatened that frogs would invade the bedroom and bed of the Egyptian pharaoh (Ex 8:3). Michal, Saul’s daughter, placed an effigy in David’s bed (1 Sm 19:11-17) when Saul sent messengers to capture him there. King David condemned the practice of killing a defenseless person sleeping in bed (2 Sm 4:7, 11). The prophet Elijah laid a dead boy on his bed and revived him (1 Kgs 17:19).<\/p>\n<p>King Ahab sulked on his bed (1 Kgs 21:4), and King Ahaziah lay on his sick bed (2 Kgs 1:4-6, 16). The prophet Amos criticized the rich who lay on beds of ivory and stretched out on their couches (Am 6:4). The prophet Ezekiel spoke symbolically of disobedient Jerusalem as a prostitute sitting on a stately couch with the Lord’s incense and oil on a table nearby (Ez 23:41). Isaiah promised that the righteous would rest in their beds (Is 57:2) and also spoke of the unrighteous setting their beds among false worshipers (vv 7-8). The psalmist flooded his bed with tears (Ps 6:6), and Proverbs refers to a sluggard on his bed (Prv 26:14).<\/p>\n<p>“Table” in the OT refers both to the temple table for the bread of the Presence and to the table used in the palace or home for meals or banquets. King Adoni-bezek had his captives scrambling for scraps under his table (Jgs 1:7). Jonathan’s disabled son Mephibosheth was allowed to sit at David’s table (2 Sm 9:7, 10-13; 19:28). Solomon’s table is described several times (1 Kgs 2:7; 4:27). The queen of Sheba was particularly impressed by the food and table service in Solomon’s palace (10:5). The prophets frequently refer to tables (Is 21:5; 28:8; 65:11; Ez 40:39-43). The few references to chairs describe people reclining at meals and indicate couches rather than actual chairs (Am 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous mentions of thrones, including those of the pharaoh (Gn 41:40; Ex 11:5), David (2 Sm 3:10; 7:13), Solomon (1 Kgs 10:18), the kings of Israel and Judah (1 Kgs 22:10), and God (1 Kgs 22:19; Pss 9:4, 7; 11:4; 93:2). The OT writers sometimes indicate thrones decorated with ivory (1 Kgs 10:18).<\/p>\n<p>The exact character of furniture in Palestine is difficult to determine. Bas-reliefs and wall paintings are more common among Israel’s neighbors. Excavations in Jericho, however, have unearthed some valuable archaeological clues. Tombs of the middle Bronze Age produced reasonably well-preserved tables, stools, and boxes, making possible a study of ancient joinery methods. A variety of small trinket boxes show evidence of bone inlay and incised decoration. Some large slabs of timber may have been beds. Although primarily Canaanite styles, the furniture reflects the household furniture used in Israel in the centuries to follow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GreekandRoman\">Greek and Roman<\/p>\n<p>Historians are quite informed about Greek furniture because of the abundance of decorated vases, bas-reliefs, bronze and terra-cotta statuettes, and literary descriptions. That archaeological evidence indicates that Greek furniture was influenced by preceding civilizations. The picture is generally one of comparative simplicity, far removed from the cluttered and crowded rooms of later civilizations.<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks made several types of seats: (1) the throne, often with a back, legs of various shapes, and armrests; (2) the lighter curved-back chair with arm supports; (3) the four-legged stool; (4) the folding stool with crossed legs traceable to Egyptian models; and (5) the bench. Representations that regularly appear on monuments dating from the eighth to the second century <span>BC<\/span> link Greek chairs to Egyptian and Assyrian prototypes.<\/p>\n<p>Greeks used couches for sleeping and for reclining at meals. Footstools were used to rest the feet or as a step up to higher couches. Like chair legs, couch legs varied in style. Some were carved in the shape of animal legs, some were turned, some were rectangular. From about the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, the legs projected above the frame. Such projections later became headboards and footboards. In Hellenistic times these headrests and footrests were carved and carried bronze medallions in high relief depicting children, satyrs, and animals. Turned legs replaced the rectangular ones. Couches were normally in wood, although bronze and marble couches are known.<\/p>\n<p>Tables were used during meals to hold dishes and food and were removed after the meal. They were made of wood, bronze, and marble and normally had four legs, but three-legged tables were occasionally used. Chests, large and small, served to store clothes, jewelry, and other articles. They were normally of wood, although some were bronze.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rome\">Rome<\/p>\n<p>Roman furniture continued many Greek patterns. The eruption of the volcano Vesuvius in <span>AD<\/span> 79 preserved actual pieces of Roman furniture in its lava flow.<\/p>\n<p>Chairs with backs were heavier than their Greek counterparts and widely used. There were several types of stools: the folding stool, mostly wooden, though sometimes metal; and a newly developed decorative stool, often of bronze, that was supported by four curved legs ornamented with scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>A variety of couches were in use. Some followed Greek models, but others were of Roman invention. Excellent examples of bronze bed frames have been preserved. Presumably, interlaced strips of leather or cords were stretched crisscross on the frame. Gold, silver, tortoiseshell, bone, and ivory decoration were used along with veneer work in rare timber. Later, couches in Italy and in other lands had high backs and sides. The Romans seem to have used tables more widely than Greeks. They appear often as permanent supports for vases and other possessions. Tables were normally rectangular with four legs, but table makers also constructed some with three legs, or even resting on a single support. Round tabletops and legs of animals became popular from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> on. Plain, undecorated wooden tables and benches were used in kitchens and workshops. Outdoor tables were usually of marble with carved animal legs or decorative figures of animals and monsters.<\/p>\n<p>There were various chests and boxes in daily use. Shelves and cupboards became much more popular than in Greek times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinNewTestamentTimes\">Palestine in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The nature of furniture in the NT is probably best understood in relation to contemporaneous Roman models. The NT refers to beds in several passages. People brought a paralytic lying on his bed to Jesus (Mt 9:2, 6; Lk 5:18). When the apostles went into Solomon’s portico, people brought the sick to them on beds (Acts 5:15). A Syro-Phoenician woman’s sick child lay on a bed (Mk 7:30). Jesus spoke of setting a lamp on a stand and not placing it under a bed (Mk 4:21; Lk 8:16), and described what would happen to people in bed when the Day of the Lord came (Lk 17:34). In another parable Jesus spoke of a needy person begging for bread at midnight from a friend who was already in bed with his family (Lk 11:7). Beds of the poor and sick were probably only pallets or mattresses (Mk 6:55; Jn 5:8). When people reclined at meals, they would have been lying on a couch (Jn 13:23).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous NT references to tables. Jesus mentioned crumbs falling from a rich man’s table (Mt 15:27; Mk 7:28; Lk 16:21). Jesus overthrew the money changers’ tables in the temple (Mt 21:12; Mk 11:15). Jesus sat with his disciples at a table for the Passover meal (Lk 22:21) and promised his disciples that they would sit at his table in God’s kingdom. The apostles were relieved of serving tables in order to preach (Acts 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>The household lamp is referred to a number of times (Mt 25:1; Mk 4:21). Terra-cotta domestic lamps have been found in abundance in excavations.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FURNITURE Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries. Palestine in Old Testament Times OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references...","summary_en":"FURNITURE Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries. Palestine in Old Testament Times OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19554,"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":56207,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:21","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:21-22<\/strong> <em>it has been determined:<\/em> Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:21-22<\/strong> <em>it has been determined:<\/em> Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:21-22 it has been determined: Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).","summary_en":"22:21-22 it has been determined: Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83833,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:21","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:21-22<\/strong> <em>it has been determined:<\/em> Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:21-22<\/strong> <em>it has been determined:<\/em> Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:21-22 it has been determined: Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).","summary_en":"22:21-22 it has been determined: Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111459,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:21","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:21-22<\/strong> <em>it has been determined:<\/em> Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:21-22<\/strong> <em>it has been determined:<\/em> Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:21-22 it has been determined: Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).","summary_en":"22:21-22 it has been determined: Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139085,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:21","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:21-22<\/strong> <em>it has been determined:<\/em> Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:21-22<\/strong> <em>it has been determined:<\/em> Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:21-22 it has been determined: Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).","summary_en":"22:21-22 it has been determined: Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":42280,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69906,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97532,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125158,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12689,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Foreordination*","title_en":"Foreordination*","content_ro":"<h3>FOREORDINATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Activity of God by which he establishes events and outcomes before they occur. In common usage, “foreordination” and the term “predestination” are synonymous. “Predestination” and “election,” however, specifically refer to the destiny of persons.<\/p>\n<p>Foreordination was referred to by many early church fathers and was a major emphasis in the theology of Augustine of Hippo (354–430). Augustine greatly influenced the Reformers, particularly John Calvin. Reformed theologians begin the study of the doctrine of foreordination with the eternal decree of God, as indicated by creeds such as the Westminster Confession of Faith. The decree of God is one, but for purposes of discussion and explanation it is usually referred to as “the decrees of God.” Martin Luther believed in foreordination but did not stress it as much as Calvin. Luther’s theology is generally silent on foreordination, primarily discussing predestination, or election. Contemporary Lutheran thought stresses conditional, rather than absolute election, that is, election or predestination based on foreseen faith.<\/p>\n<p>Foreordination underlies the whole plan of God: his decision to create the universe, to care for it (providence), and to determine its destiny “according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). The Westminster Shorter Catechism states the teaching in this way: God has decreed “his eternal purpose according to the counsel of his will, whereby, for his own glory, he hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.” Foreordination, then, is at the foundation of all Christian teaching, for it concerns the history and destiny of the whole world, the universe, and all that it contains.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul spoke of God’s plan for the fulfillment of all creation: “For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Rom 8:19-21, <span>rsv<\/span>). Scripture gives only a glimpse of the redemption of the whole creation. It speaks of new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells (2 Pt 3:13). Those things that mar human existence and demonstrate human fallenness and sinfulness (i.e., depravity) will all pass away. God will make “all things new” (Rv 21:1-5), so the destiny of everything rests with God himself.<\/p>\n<p>Foreordination creates problems for theology and commonsense thinking, particularly in relation to human freedom and responsibility and that aspect of foreordination concerned with salvation. How can people be held responsible for their actions and decisions if those actions have been predetermined? To remove that difficulty, some have denied God’s foreordination as it relates to human freedom. In creating free beings, they argue, God must have limited his determination of things that “must” come to pass. Otherwise, free and responsible human activity has no meaning. Calvinism rejects such an argument, insisting that free activity is possible even though it is foreordained and foreknown.<\/p>\n<p>Denial of the doctrine of foreordination implies that God does not control his creation. If that were true, the existence and happenings in the universe, including human activity, would be determined either by something above or beyond God, or by occurrences whose ultimate causes are unknown. God’s providence and care revealed in the Bible and human experience make such a view untenable. Christian thought generally states that God foreordains and controls his creation and that humans are able to act freely and responsibly within that larger control. The apparent contradiction or paradox remains unresolved because there is a limit to human understanding.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForeordinationinScripture\">Foreordination in Scripture<\/p>\n<p>There are many references to foreordination (including predestination, or election) and the related idea of foreknowledge in the Bible. Foreordination can be thought of as logically prior to foreknowledge, but there is no actual priority since both activities are eternal in God.<\/p>\n<p>Speaking of judgment to come upon Babylon, God said, “This is the purpose that is purposed concerning the whole earth; and this is the hand that is stretched out over all the nations. For the <span>Lord<\/span> of hosts has purposed, and who will annul it? His hand is stretched out, and who will turn it back?” (Is 14:26-27, <span>rsv<\/span>). God also declared that he has determined the end from the beginning. “My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose” (Is 46:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul stated that the purpose of God is carried out “according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Ps 119:89-91; Dn 4:35).<\/p>\n<p>With respect to human affairs, it is said that one’s life span is determined (Jb 14:5), that God’s concern extends to his creatures (Ps 104:14-30; Mt 10:29), and even the hairs on our heads are numbered (Mt 10:30). Furthermore, God’s plan extends to peoples and nations, for “he made from one every nation of men to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their habitation” (Acts 17:26, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God knows and even uses people’s evil acts for his own ends. For example, although Joseph’s brothers sinned by selling him into slavery, Joseph later said, “As for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today” (Gn 50:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus, but God used that sinful intent. Jesus said, “For the Son of man goes as it has been determined; but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed!” (Lk 22:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). On the day of Pentecost the apostle Peter said, “This Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men” (Acts 2:23, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. 4:27-28). Paul refers to God’s determining authority over Pharaoh’s acts (Rom 9:17). Revelation 17:17 says, “God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God, then, foreordains the events of nature and history, and even evil acts are subject to his control and are made to fulfill his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Election of sinners to salvation through Christ is also included in God’s foreordination (Rom 8:28-39; cf. Acts 13:48; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Pt 2:9). God’s plan of salvation is grounded in his eternal love and good pleasure (Eph 1:3-14; Rom 5:6-11). The Christian is the recipient of God’s grace in that the believer knows God and is known (i.e., loved) by God (Gal 4:9). Both election and believers’ faith are part of the salvation process.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForeordinationandProvidence\">Foreordination and Providence<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of foreordination is implied in the doctrine of providence or God’s care. Providence is the working out of God’s plan for the world. God’s care and control of the whole creation point to his plan of redemption for man and woman made in his image. God sovereignly controls the events that take place in the world, but God is not responsible for sin. He created human beings who may say no to God as well as yes. That does not mean that God’s plan can be thwarted; it goes on in spite of opposition. God’s ultimate plan is being realized through all the events of human history, evil and good. Yet his sovereignty is not imposed arbitrarily. God is not a tyrant but rather is holy, loving, and righteous. His plan is carried out according to his nature, which is expressed in care and concern for the whole creation and in steadfast love for undeserving sinners.<\/p>\n<p>“Natural law” refers to the rules God has laid down (foreordained) to control the universe. What about destructive forces of nature, such as earthquakes, tornadoes, and hurricanes? Why are such apparent evils necessary in a world made and controlled by a loving God? It is no answer to suggest that God is unable to act or control nature fully. If life’s total meaning resided in the temporal, physical world, there might be reason for complaint. But considering the whole plan of God and his ultimate redemptive purpose, the answer takes on a different dimension. God’s ultimate purpose transcends the present life and centers in the fullness of the redemptive kingdom yet to be revealed (Rv 11:15; 21:1-4). The doctrine of foreordination is a great mystery, but it should be a source of joy and comfort to believers whose loving Lord has brought them to a knowledge of his great plan.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Elect, Election; Foreknowledge.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FOREORDINATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Activity of God by which he establishes events and outcomes before they occur. In common usage, “foreordination” and the term “predestination” are synonymous. “Predestination” and “election,” however, specifically refer to the destiny of persons.<\/p>\n<p>Foreordination was referred to by many early church fathers and was a major emphasis in the theology of Augustine of Hippo (354–430). Augustine greatly influenced the Reformers, particularly John Calvin. Reformed theologians begin the study of the doctrine of foreordination with the eternal decree of God, as indicated by creeds such as the Westminster Confession of Faith. The decree of God is one, but for purposes of discussion and explanation it is usually referred to as “the decrees of God.” Martin Luther believed in foreordination but did not stress it as much as Calvin. Luther’s theology is generally silent on foreordination, primarily discussing predestination, or election. Contemporary Lutheran thought stresses conditional, rather than absolute election, that is, election or predestination based on foreseen faith.<\/p>\n<p>Foreordination underlies the whole plan of God: his decision to create the universe, to care for it (providence), and to determine its destiny “according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). The Westminster Shorter Catechism states the teaching in this way: God has decreed “his eternal purpose according to the counsel of his will, whereby, for his own glory, he hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.” Foreordination, then, is at the foundation of all Christian teaching, for it concerns the history and destiny of the whole world, the universe, and all that it contains.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul spoke of God’s plan for the fulfillment of all creation: “For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Rom 8:19-21, <span>rsv<\/span>). Scripture gives only a glimpse of the redemption of the whole creation. It speaks of new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells (2 Pt 3:13). Those things that mar human existence and demonstrate human fallenness and sinfulness (i.e., depravity) will all pass away. God will make “all things new” (Rv 21:1-5), so the destiny of everything rests with God himself.<\/p>\n<p>Foreordination creates problems for theology and commonsense thinking, particularly in relation to human freedom and responsibility and that aspect of foreordination concerned with salvation. How can people be held responsible for their actions and decisions if those actions have been predetermined? To remove that difficulty, some have denied God’s foreordination as it relates to human freedom. In creating free beings, they argue, God must have limited his determination of things that “must” come to pass. Otherwise, free and responsible human activity has no meaning. Calvinism rejects such an argument, insisting that free activity is possible even though it is foreordained and foreknown.<\/p>\n<p>Denial of the doctrine of foreordination implies that God does not control his creation. If that were true, the existence and happenings in the universe, including human activity, would be determined either by something above or beyond God, or by occurrences whose ultimate causes are unknown. God’s providence and care revealed in the Bible and human experience make such a view untenable. Christian thought generally states that God foreordains and controls his creation and that humans are able to act freely and responsibly within that larger control. The apparent contradiction or paradox remains unresolved because there is a limit to human understanding.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForeordinationinScripture\">Foreordination in Scripture<\/p>\n<p>There are many references to foreordination (including predestination, or election) and the related idea of foreknowledge in the Bible. Foreordination can be thought of as logically prior to foreknowledge, but there is no actual priority since both activities are eternal in God.<\/p>\n<p>Speaking of judgment to come upon Babylon, God said, “This is the purpose that is purposed concerning the whole earth; and this is the hand that is stretched out over all the nations. For the <span>Lord<\/span> of hosts has purposed, and who will annul it? His hand is stretched out, and who will turn it back?” (Is 14:26-27, <span>rsv<\/span>). God also declared that he has determined the end from the beginning. “My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose” (Is 46:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul stated that the purpose of God is carried out “according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Ps 119:89-91; Dn 4:35).<\/p>\n<p>With respect to human affairs, it is said that one’s life span is determined (Jb 14:5), that God’s concern extends to his creatures (Ps 104:14-30; Mt 10:29), and even the hairs on our heads are numbered (Mt 10:30). Furthermore, God’s plan extends to peoples and nations, for “he made from one every nation of men to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their habitation” (Acts 17:26, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God knows and even uses people’s evil acts for his own ends. For example, although Joseph’s brothers sinned by selling him into slavery, Joseph later said, “As for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today” (Gn 50:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus, but God used that sinful intent. Jesus said, “For the Son of man goes as it has been determined; but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed!” (Lk 22:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). On the day of Pentecost the apostle Peter said, “This Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men” (Acts 2:23, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. 4:27-28). Paul refers to God’s determining authority over Pharaoh’s acts (Rom 9:17). Revelation 17:17 says, “God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God, then, foreordains the events of nature and history, and even evil acts are subject to his control and are made to fulfill his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Election of sinners to salvation through Christ is also included in God’s foreordination (Rom 8:28-39; cf. Acts 13:48; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Pt 2:9). God’s plan of salvation is grounded in his eternal love and good pleasure (Eph 1:3-14; Rom 5:6-11). The Christian is the recipient of God’s grace in that the believer knows God and is known (i.e., loved) by God (Gal 4:9). Both election and believers’ faith are part of the salvation process.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForeordinationandProvidence\">Foreordination and Providence<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of foreordination is implied in the doctrine of providence or God’s care. Providence is the working out of God’s plan for the world. God’s care and control of the whole creation point to his plan of redemption for man and woman made in his image. God sovereignly controls the events that take place in the world, but God is not responsible for sin. He created human beings who may say no to God as well as yes. That does not mean that God’s plan can be thwarted; it goes on in spite of opposition. God’s ultimate plan is being realized through all the events of human history, evil and good. Yet his sovereignty is not imposed arbitrarily. God is not a tyrant but rather is holy, loving, and righteous. His plan is carried out according to his nature, which is expressed in care and concern for the whole creation and in steadfast love for undeserving sinners.<\/p>\n<p>“Natural law” refers to the rules God has laid down (foreordained) to control the universe. What about destructive forces of nature, such as earthquakes, tornadoes, and hurricanes? Why are such apparent evils necessary in a world made and controlled by a loving God? It is no answer to suggest that God is unable to act or control nature fully. If life’s total meaning resided in the temporal, physical world, there might be reason for complaint. But considering the whole plan of God and his ultimate redemptive purpose, the answer takes on a different dimension. God’s ultimate purpose transcends the present life and centers in the fullness of the redemptive kingdom yet to be revealed (Rv 11:15; 21:1-4). The doctrine of foreordination is a great mystery, but it should be a source of joy and comfort to believers whose loving Lord has brought them to a knowledge of his great plan.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Elect, Election; Foreknowledge.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FOREORDINATION* Activity of God by which he establishes events and outcomes before they occur. In common usage, “foreordination” and the term “predestination” are synonymous. “Predestination” and “election,” however, specifically refer to the destiny of persons. Foreordination was referred to by many early church fathers and was a major emphasis in the theology of Augustine of Hippo (354–430). Augustine greatly influenced the Reformers, particularly John Calvin. Reformed theologians begin the...","summary_en":"FOREORDINATION* Activity of God by which he establishes events and outcomes before they occur. In common usage, “foreordination” and the term “predestination” are synonymous. “Predestination” and “election,” however, specifically refer to the destiny of persons. Foreordination was referred to by many early church fathers and was a major emphasis in the theology of Augustine of Hippo (354–430). Augustine greatly influenced the Reformers, particularly John Calvin. Reformed theologians begin the...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56208,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:22","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:22<\/strong> <em>what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him:<\/em> Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:22<\/strong> <em>what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him:<\/em> Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:22 what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him: Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).","summary_en":"22:22 what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him: Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83834,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:22","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:22<\/strong> <em>what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him:<\/em> Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:22<\/strong> <em>what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him:<\/em> Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:22 what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him: Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).","summary_en":"22:22 what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him: Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111460,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:22","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:22<\/strong> <em>what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him:<\/em> Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:22<\/strong> <em>what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him:<\/em> Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:22 what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him: Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).","summary_en":"22:22 what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him: Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139086,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:22","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:22<\/strong> <em>what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him:<\/em> Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:22<\/strong> <em>what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him:<\/em> Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:22 what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him: Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).","summary_en":"22:22 what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him: Judas suffered guilt, condemnation, and a gruesome death for betraying Jesus (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":42364,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42499,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69990,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70125,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97616,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97751,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125242,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125377,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9657,"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":39781,"type":"chart","type_label":"Diagramă","type_icon":"📊","type_color":"#3b82f6","title_ro":"Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels","title_en":"Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels","content_ro":"<h3>Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels<\/h3>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p><strong>1 Peter Reference<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Gospel Reference<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:3, 23<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 3:3, 7<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:4<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 12:33<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 20:29<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 24:25-27<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:13<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 12:35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:22; 4:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 13:34; 15:12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:4, 7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mk 12:10; Mt 21:42<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mt 5:16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:19-20<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 6:32-35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:25<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 10:11, 14<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>3:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 6:27-28<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>4:13<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mt 5:12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>5:3<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 22:24-27<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>5:5-6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 14:11; 18:14<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","content_en":"<h3>Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels<\/h3>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p><strong>1 Peter Reference<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Gospel Reference<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:3, 23<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 3:3, 7<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:4<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 12:33<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 20:29<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 24:25-27<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:13<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 12:35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>1:22; 4:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 13:34; 15:12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:4, 7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mk 12:10; Mt 21:42<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mt 5:16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:19-20<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 6:32-35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>2:25<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Jn 10:11, 14<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>3:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 6:27-28<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>4:13<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mt 5:12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>5:3<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 22:24-27<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>5:5-6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Lk 14:11; 18:14<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","summary_ro":"Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels 1 Peter Reference Gospel Reference 1:3, 23 Jn 3:3, 7 1:4 Lk 12:33 1:8 Jn 20:29 1:10-12 Lk 24:25-27 1:13 Lk 12:35 1:22; 4:8 Jn 13:34; 15:12 2:4, 7 Mk 12:10; Mt 21:42 2:12 Mt 5:16 2:19-20 Lk 6:32-35 2:25 Jn 10:11, 14 3:9 Lk 6:27-28 4:13 Mt 5:12 5:3 Lk 22:24-27 5:5-6 Lk 14:11; 18:14","summary_en":"Similarities between Peter’s Words in 1 Peter and Jesus’ Words in the Gospels 1 Peter Reference Gospel Reference 1:3, 23 Jn 3:3, 7 1:4 Lk 12:33 1:8 Jn 20:29 1:10-12 Lk 24:25-27 1:13 Lk 12:35 1:22; 4:8 Jn 13:34; 15:12 2:4, 7 Mk 12:10; Mt 21:42 2:12 Mt 5:16 2:19-20 Lk 6:32-35 2:25 Jn 10:11, 14 3:9 Lk 6:27-28 4:13 Mt 5:12 5:3 Lk 22:24-27 5:5-6 Lk 14:11; 18:14","source":"Charts\/Charts.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56209,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:24","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:24<\/strong> <em>who would be the greatest among them:<\/em> See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:24<\/strong> <em>who would be the greatest among them:<\/em> See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:24 who would be the greatest among them: See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.","summary_en":"22:24 who would be the greatest among them: See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83835,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:24","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:24<\/strong> <em>who would be the greatest among them:<\/em> See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:24<\/strong> <em>who would be the greatest among them:<\/em> See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:24 who would be the greatest among them: See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.","summary_en":"22:24 who would be the greatest among them: See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111461,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:24","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:24<\/strong> <em>who would be the greatest among them:<\/em> See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:24<\/strong> <em>who would be the greatest among them:<\/em> See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:24 who would be the greatest among them: See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.","summary_en":"22:24 who would be the greatest among them: See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139087,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:24","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:24<\/strong> <em>who would be the greatest among them:<\/em> See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:24<\/strong> <em>who would be the greatest among them:<\/em> See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:24 who would be the greatest among them: See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.","summary_en":"22:24 who would be the greatest among them: See also Mark 9:33-37; 10:35-45.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":56210,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:25","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:25<\/strong> <em>friends of the people:<\/em> This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:25<\/strong> <em>friends of the people:<\/em> This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:25 friends of the people: This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.","summary_en":"22:25 friends of the people: This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83836,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:25","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:25<\/strong> <em>friends of the people:<\/em> This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:25<\/strong> <em>friends of the people:<\/em> This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:25 friends of the people: This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.","summary_en":"22:25 friends of the people: This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111462,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:25","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:25<\/strong> <em>friends of the people:<\/em> This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:25<\/strong> <em>friends of the people:<\/em> This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:25 friends of the people: This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.","summary_en":"22:25 friends of the people: This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139088,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:25","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:25<\/strong> <em>friends of the people:<\/em> This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:25<\/strong> <em>friends of the people:<\/em> This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:25 friends of the people: This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.","summary_en":"22:25 friends of the people: This translates a Greek word that refers to the practice of rulers bestowing gifts and favors on their subjects to gain loyalty and honor. Jesus contrasted the world’s leadership style—military power, coercion, and bribery—with his own servant leadership in sacrificing himself for others.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66366,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Empowering Leadership","title_en":"Empowering Leadership","content_ro":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","summary_en":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93992,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Empowering Leadership","title_en":"Empowering Leadership","content_ro":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","summary_en":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121618,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Empowering Leadership","title_en":"Empowering Leadership","content_ro":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","summary_en":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149244,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Empowering Leadership","title_en":"Empowering Leadership","content_ro":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","summary_en":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":8889,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Deacon, Deaconess*","title_en":"Deacon, Deaconess*","content_ro":"<h3>DEACON, DEACONESS*<\/h3>\n<p>Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century <span>AD<\/span> Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsoftheConcept\">Origins of the Concept<\/p>\n<h5>Greek Usage<\/h5>\n<p>References have been found in extrabiblical writings where the Greek word “deacon” meant “waiter,” “servant,” “steward,” or “messenger.” In at least two instances it indicated a baker and a cook. In religious usage the word described various attendants in pagan temples. Ancient documents show “deacons” presiding at the dedication of a statue to the Greek god Hermes. Serapis and Isis, Egyptian deities, were served by a college of “deacons” presided over by a priest.<\/p>\n<h5>General New Testament Usage<\/h5>\n<p>The same word was used by biblical writers in a general sense to describe various ministries or services. Not until later in the development of the apostolic church was the term applied to a distinct body of church officers. Among its general usages, “deacon” refers to a waiter at meals (Jn 2:5, 9), a king’s attendant (Mt 22:13), a servant of Satan (2 Cor 11:15), a servant of God (6:4), a servant of Christ (11:23), a servant of the church (Col 1:24-25), and a political ruler (Rom 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>The NT presents servanthood in the sense of ministry or service as a mark of the whole church—that is, as normative for all disciples (Mt 20:26-28; Lk 22:26-27). Jesus’ teaching on the final judgment equates ministry with feeding the hungry, welcoming strangers, clothing the naked, and visiting the sick and imprisoned (Mt 25:31-46). The entire NT emphasizes compassionate care for individuals’ physical and spiritual needs as well as the giving of oneself to meeting those needs. Such service is ultimately a ministry to Christ himself (v 45).<\/p>\n<h5>Origin of the Office<\/h5>\n<p>There is little question that before the end of the first century the general term for service or ministry became a kind of title for a position or office in the church. That development evidently went through several stages.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical scholars emphasize a relationship between the <em>hazzan<\/em> of the Jewish synagogue and the Christian office of deacon. The <em>hazzan<\/em> opened and closed the synagogue doors, kept it clean, and handed out the books for reading. It was probably to such a person that Jesus handed the scroll of Isaiah after finishing his reading (Lk 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>Other NT scholars give considerable attention to the choosing of the seven (Acts 6:1-6); they see that action as a historical forerunner of a more developed structure (Phil 1:1; 1 Tm 3:8-13—the two specific references to an “office” of deacon). Luke devoted considerable attention in Acts to the selection of a new set of church leaders. Overworked with a variety of responsibilities, the 12 apostles proposed a division of labor to ensure care for the Hellenist (Greek-speaking) widows in the church’s daily distribution of food and alms. Seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (Acts 6:3), subsequently became prominent in the Jerusalem congregation, doing works of charity and caring for physical needs.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars caution that the diaconate should not be exclusively linked with charitable works, since the Greek word used in Acts 6:2 is related to the word translated “ministry of the word” in verse 4. Those chosen to oversee the care for physical needs were people of spiritual stature. Stephen, for instance, “full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs” (6:8, <span>rsv<\/span>). Philip, appointed as one of the seven in Acts 6, “preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” (8:12). Philip also baptized (v 38) and is referred to as an evangelist (21:8).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeaconsintheEarlyChurch\">Deacons in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>Those who cite Acts 6 as a preliminary stage of the office of deacon refer to the spread of the practice from the church in Jerusalem to the gentile congregations sprouting elsewhere. Many churches probably took the appointing of “the Jerusalem seven” as a pattern to follow, some even adopting the number seven. In a letter of the third-century pope Cornelius, for example, the church of Rome was said to have maintained seven for the number of deacons.<\/p>\n<p>By the time the church of Philippi received its instructions from the apostle Paul (c. <span>AD<\/span> 62) and Timothy had Paul’s first letter in hand, “deacon” had become a technical term referring to a specific office in the churches. In Philippians 1:1 Paul addressed the church in general and then added “with bishops and deacons.” Some interpreters consider that to be a clear establishment of two distinct groups within the larger church body, though no further description is given. Possibly the deacons of that congregation were responsible for collecting and then dispatching the offerings referred to (Phil 4:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Timothy 3:8-13 instructions are given about qualifications for the office of deacon. Although that is the most detailed treatment of the subject in the NT, it is actually quite sketchy. Most of the qualifications, dealing with personal character and behavior, are similar to those for a bishop. For instance, a deacon is to be truthful, monogamous, “not addicted to much wine,” and a responsible parent. Verse 11, requiring that “the women likewise must be serious, not slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things” (<span>rsv<\/span>), may refer not to deacons’ wives but to deaconesses, as several translations note (<span>niv<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). In any event, it is clear that women participated in the work of the diaconate.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the office of bishop (1 Tm 3:2), deacons are not described as providing teaching or hospitality. In fact, no mention is made of any functional qualifications to clarify deacons’ or deaconesses’ roles in the early church. The character qualifications listed are appropriate for those with monetary and administrative responsibilities (as Acts 6:1-6 suggests). Timothy is told that good deacons will not go unrewarded; not only will their faith increase, but also their good standing among those whom they serve (1 Tm 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>The NT writings indicate that to be chosen as a deacon or deaconess is a high compliment and affirmation. Named as “deacons” were Timothy (1 Thes 3:2; 1 Tm 4:6), Tychicus (Col 4:7), Epaphras (1:7), Paul (1 Cor 3:5)—and even Christ (Rom 15:8, “servant”). Biblical “deaconing” is not characterized by power and prominence but by service to others. In imitation of Jesus’ life, the deacon or deaconess followed the servant pattern. The Christian diaconate thus contrasted sharply with the prevailing Greek thought of service, which was considered unworthy of the dignity of free men. (The Greek philosopher Plato wrote, “How can man be happy when he has to serve someone?”)<\/p>\n<p>The office of deacon differed from the office of elder, which was adapted from a definite Jewish pattern in the OT (see Nm 11:16-17; Dt 29:10). The diaconate, on the other hand, developed from the strong, personal, historical example of Jesus, the servant who compassionately met concrete human needs.<\/p>\n<p>As the office of deacon became more firmly established, its duties could be defined as those of pastoral care. The poor and the sick received their service not only physically but also with instruction and consolation. The homes of church members became familiar territory to a deacon or deaconess. A pattern of visitation was established to discover and then meet the needs of the church body at large. Although that included the administration of funds, it went far beyond it. Those who served as deacons and deaconesses undoubtedly became symbols of loving care for the church in general.<\/p>\n<p>Where the office of deacon fits into the larger pattern of church order within the NT is difficult to determine because of the obvious variety present during the formative years. Some church historians conclude that as ecclesiastical structure developed, elders provided congregational leadership. Deacons assisted them, especially in social services and pastoral care. The late first and early second centuries witnessed a distinctive threefold ministry of deacons, elders (presbyters), and bishops. Bishops or “overseers” began to exercise authority over areas or groups of churches.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deaconess\">Deaconess<\/p>\n<p>Where did women fit into the ministry of the early church? Paul’s inclusion of references to women in ministry is striking when compared with the role of women in general in the first century. He commended Phoebe for her service in the church at Cenchrea, using the word “deacon” to describe her (Rom 16:1). He praised her as a “helper” (v 2), a word that denotes leadership qualities (cf. Rom 12:8; 1 Tm 3:4-5). Some scholars have used that reference as an example of early development of the office of deaconess. Others have interpreted it in a nontechnical sense, meaning that Phoebe functioned in a generally serving role and thus was worthy of recognition at Rome. Whether “deacon” was used technically or descriptively, ministry for both women and men in the NT was patterned after the example of Jesus, who “came not to be served but to serve” (Mk 10:45). Because of the large number of female converts (Acts 5:14; 17:4), women functioned in such areas of ministry as visitation, instruction in discipleship, and assistance in baptism. Deaconesses are mentioned in third-century documents as administering baptism to female converts.<\/p>\n<p>Considering the rigid separation of the sexes in the Near East at that time, female participation in church ministry stands out in bold relief. A governor of Bithynia, Pliny the Younger (early second century), in his <em>Correspondence with Trajan<\/em> verified women officeholders in the church. Pliny also mentioned two deaconesses who were martyred for the cause of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Elder; Pastor; Presbyter.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEACON, DEACONESS*<\/h3>\n<p>Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century <span>AD<\/span> Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsoftheConcept\">Origins of the Concept<\/p>\n<h5>Greek Usage<\/h5>\n<p>References have been found in extrabiblical writings where the Greek word “deacon” meant “waiter,” “servant,” “steward,” or “messenger.” In at least two instances it indicated a baker and a cook. In religious usage the word described various attendants in pagan temples. Ancient documents show “deacons” presiding at the dedication of a statue to the Greek god Hermes. Serapis and Isis, Egyptian deities, were served by a college of “deacons” presided over by a priest.<\/p>\n<h5>General New Testament Usage<\/h5>\n<p>The same word was used by biblical writers in a general sense to describe various ministries or services. Not until later in the development of the apostolic church was the term applied to a distinct body of church officers. Among its general usages, “deacon” refers to a waiter at meals (Jn 2:5, 9), a king’s attendant (Mt 22:13), a servant of Satan (2 Cor 11:15), a servant of God (6:4), a servant of Christ (11:23), a servant of the church (Col 1:24-25), and a political ruler (Rom 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>The NT presents servanthood in the sense of ministry or service as a mark of the whole church—that is, as normative for all disciples (Mt 20:26-28; Lk 22:26-27). Jesus’ teaching on the final judgment equates ministry with feeding the hungry, welcoming strangers, clothing the naked, and visiting the sick and imprisoned (Mt 25:31-46). The entire NT emphasizes compassionate care for individuals’ physical and spiritual needs as well as the giving of oneself to meeting those needs. Such service is ultimately a ministry to Christ himself (v 45).<\/p>\n<h5>Origin of the Office<\/h5>\n<p>There is little question that before the end of the first century the general term for service or ministry became a kind of title for a position or office in the church. That development evidently went through several stages.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical scholars emphasize a relationship between the <em>hazzan<\/em> of the Jewish synagogue and the Christian office of deacon. The <em>hazzan<\/em> opened and closed the synagogue doors, kept it clean, and handed out the books for reading. It was probably to such a person that Jesus handed the scroll of Isaiah after finishing his reading (Lk 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>Other NT scholars give considerable attention to the choosing of the seven (Acts 6:1-6); they see that action as a historical forerunner of a more developed structure (Phil 1:1; 1 Tm 3:8-13—the two specific references to an “office” of deacon). Luke devoted considerable attention in Acts to the selection of a new set of church leaders. Overworked with a variety of responsibilities, the 12 apostles proposed a division of labor to ensure care for the Hellenist (Greek-speaking) widows in the church’s daily distribution of food and alms. Seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (Acts 6:3), subsequently became prominent in the Jerusalem congregation, doing works of charity and caring for physical needs.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars caution that the diaconate should not be exclusively linked with charitable works, since the Greek word used in Acts 6:2 is related to the word translated “ministry of the word” in verse 4. Those chosen to oversee the care for physical needs were people of spiritual stature. Stephen, for instance, “full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs” (6:8, <span>rsv<\/span>). Philip, appointed as one of the seven in Acts 6, “preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” (8:12). Philip also baptized (v 38) and is referred to as an evangelist (21:8).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeaconsintheEarlyChurch\">Deacons in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>Those who cite Acts 6 as a preliminary stage of the office of deacon refer to the spread of the practice from the church in Jerusalem to the gentile congregations sprouting elsewhere. Many churches probably took the appointing of “the Jerusalem seven” as a pattern to follow, some even adopting the number seven. In a letter of the third-century pope Cornelius, for example, the church of Rome was said to have maintained seven for the number of deacons.<\/p>\n<p>By the time the church of Philippi received its instructions from the apostle Paul (c. <span>AD<\/span> 62) and Timothy had Paul’s first letter in hand, “deacon” had become a technical term referring to a specific office in the churches. In Philippians 1:1 Paul addressed the church in general and then added “with bishops and deacons.” Some interpreters consider that to be a clear establishment of two distinct groups within the larger church body, though no further description is given. Possibly the deacons of that congregation were responsible for collecting and then dispatching the offerings referred to (Phil 4:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Timothy 3:8-13 instructions are given about qualifications for the office of deacon. Although that is the most detailed treatment of the subject in the NT, it is actually quite sketchy. Most of the qualifications, dealing with personal character and behavior, are similar to those for a bishop. For instance, a deacon is to be truthful, monogamous, “not addicted to much wine,” and a responsible parent. Verse 11, requiring that “the women likewise must be serious, not slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things” (<span>rsv<\/span>), may refer not to deacons’ wives but to deaconesses, as several translations note (<span>niv<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). In any event, it is clear that women participated in the work of the diaconate.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the office of bishop (1 Tm 3:2), deacons are not described as providing teaching or hospitality. In fact, no mention is made of any functional qualifications to clarify deacons’ or deaconesses’ roles in the early church. The character qualifications listed are appropriate for those with monetary and administrative responsibilities (as Acts 6:1-6 suggests). Timothy is told that good deacons will not go unrewarded; not only will their faith increase, but also their good standing among those whom they serve (1 Tm 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>The NT writings indicate that to be chosen as a deacon or deaconess is a high compliment and affirmation. Named as “deacons” were Timothy (1 Thes 3:2; 1 Tm 4:6), Tychicus (Col 4:7), Epaphras (1:7), Paul (1 Cor 3:5)—and even Christ (Rom 15:8, “servant”). Biblical “deaconing” is not characterized by power and prominence but by service to others. In imitation of Jesus’ life, the deacon or deaconess followed the servant pattern. The Christian diaconate thus contrasted sharply with the prevailing Greek thought of service, which was considered unworthy of the dignity of free men. (The Greek philosopher Plato wrote, “How can man be happy when he has to serve someone?”)<\/p>\n<p>The office of deacon differed from the office of elder, which was adapted from a definite Jewish pattern in the OT (see Nm 11:16-17; Dt 29:10). The diaconate, on the other hand, developed from the strong, personal, historical example of Jesus, the servant who compassionately met concrete human needs.<\/p>\n<p>As the office of deacon became more firmly established, its duties could be defined as those of pastoral care. The poor and the sick received their service not only physically but also with instruction and consolation. The homes of church members became familiar territory to a deacon or deaconess. A pattern of visitation was established to discover and then meet the needs of the church body at large. Although that included the administration of funds, it went far beyond it. Those who served as deacons and deaconesses undoubtedly became symbols of loving care for the church in general.<\/p>\n<p>Where the office of deacon fits into the larger pattern of church order within the NT is difficult to determine because of the obvious variety present during the formative years. Some church historians conclude that as ecclesiastical structure developed, elders provided congregational leadership. Deacons assisted them, especially in social services and pastoral care. The late first and early second centuries witnessed a distinctive threefold ministry of deacons, elders (presbyters), and bishops. Bishops or “overseers” began to exercise authority over areas or groups of churches.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deaconess\">Deaconess<\/p>\n<p>Where did women fit into the ministry of the early church? Paul’s inclusion of references to women in ministry is striking when compared with the role of women in general in the first century. He commended Phoebe for her service in the church at Cenchrea, using the word “deacon” to describe her (Rom 16:1). He praised her as a “helper” (v 2), a word that denotes leadership qualities (cf. Rom 12:8; 1 Tm 3:4-5). Some scholars have used that reference as an example of early development of the office of deaconess. Others have interpreted it in a nontechnical sense, meaning that Phoebe functioned in a generally serving role and thus was worthy of recognition at Rome. Whether “deacon” was used technically or descriptively, ministry for both women and men in the NT was patterned after the example of Jesus, who “came not to be served but to serve” (Mk 10:45). Because of the large number of female converts (Acts 5:14; 17:4), women functioned in such areas of ministry as visitation, instruction in discipleship, and assistance in baptism. Deaconesses are mentioned in third-century documents as administering baptism to female converts.<\/p>\n<p>Considering the rigid separation of the sexes in the Near East at that time, female participation in church ministry stands out in bold relief. A governor of Bithynia, Pliny the Younger (early second century), in his <em>Correspondence with Trajan<\/em> verified women officeholders in the church. Pliny also mentioned two deaconesses who were martyred for the cause of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Elder; Pastor; Presbyter.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEACON, DEACONESS* Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century AD Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services. Origins of the Concept Gr...","summary_en":"DEACON, DEACONESS* Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century AD Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services. Origins of the Concept Gr...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28857,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Paradox*","title_en":"Paradox*","content_ro":"<h3>Paradox*<\/h3>\n<p>Form of expression that seems to be either self-contradictory or absurd but at another level expresses fundamental truth. It is often employed to get hearers to think at a deeper and more critical level. It may often be closely related to hyperbole, an exaggerated statement, except that for the paradox there is an apparent element of contradiction, which arrests attention and demands consideration.<\/p>\n<p>In the ministry of Jesus one finds it in such expressions as grown persons being born again. “Can a man enter a second time into his mother’s womb,” Nicodemus asks, “and be born?” (Jn 3:4). Or again, in response to the attempts of rich men to enter the kingdom, Jesus says that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle (an impossibility) than for a rich man to enter the kingdom (Mk 10:25). The point is not to focus on the literal statement or take it word for word but to understand its essential purpose. In this instance, it is a form of “shock treatment” to force the wealthy to see how their attitudes toward wealth have excluded them from the kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Much of the use of paradox in Jesus’ ministry has to do with his attempts to show that the perspective, or value system, of the kingdom represents a complete reversal of the values by which people live. Whosoever will lose his life will find it (Mt 10:39). The last shall be first, and the first last (Lk 13:30). Whoever would be greatest of all must be servant of all (Mk 10:43; Lk 22:26). Indeed, the servant ministry of Jesus himself underscores this great reversal of the kingdom. After washing the feet of the disciples, Jesus says, “You call me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet” (Jn 13:13-14, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Paradox also enters Christian expression when one attempts to speak of God in the language of men. Thus God is “before all time.” Even “God in flesh” is paradoxical yet profoundly true. People inevitably and of necessity speak of God in terms of their own experience, yet God cannot be limited by such experience or language, for he is infinitely greater. Hence, language is a limited instrument for speaking of him who is not limited.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Paradox*<\/h3>\n<p>Form of expression that seems to be either self-contradictory or absurd but at another level expresses fundamental truth. It is often employed to get hearers to think at a deeper and more critical level. It may often be closely related to hyperbole, an exaggerated statement, except that for the paradox there is an apparent element of contradiction, which arrests attention and demands consideration.<\/p>\n<p>In the ministry of Jesus one finds it in such expressions as grown persons being born again. “Can a man enter a second time into his mother’s womb,” Nicodemus asks, “and be born?” (Jn 3:4). Or again, in response to the attempts of rich men to enter the kingdom, Jesus says that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle (an impossibility) than for a rich man to enter the kingdom (Mk 10:25). The point is not to focus on the literal statement or take it word for word but to understand its essential purpose. In this instance, it is a form of “shock treatment” to force the wealthy to see how their attitudes toward wealth have excluded them from the kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Much of the use of paradox in Jesus’ ministry has to do with his attempts to show that the perspective, or value system, of the kingdom represents a complete reversal of the values by which people live. Whosoever will lose his life will find it (Mt 10:39). The last shall be first, and the first last (Lk 13:30). Whoever would be greatest of all must be servant of all (Mk 10:43; Lk 22:26). Indeed, the servant ministry of Jesus himself underscores this great reversal of the kingdom. After washing the feet of the disciples, Jesus says, “You call me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet” (Jn 13:13-14, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Paradox also enters Christian expression when one attempts to speak of God in the language of men. Thus God is “before all time.” Even “God in flesh” is paradoxical yet profoundly true. People inevitably and of necessity speak of God in terms of their own experience, yet God cannot be limited by such experience or language, for he is infinitely greater. Hence, language is a limited instrument for speaking of him who is not limited.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Paradox* Form of expression that seems to be either self-contradictory or absurd but at another level expresses fundamental truth. It is often employed to get hearers to think at a deeper and more critical level. It may often be closely related to hyperbole, an exaggerated statement, except that for the paradox there is an apparent element of contradiction, which arrests attention and demands consideration. In the ministry of Jesus one finds it in such expressions as grown persons being born ...","summary_en":"Paradox* Form of expression that seems to be either self-contradictory or absurd but at another level expresses fundamental truth. It is often employed to get hearers to think at a deeper and more critical level. It may often be closely related to hyperbole, an exaggerated statement, except that for the paradox there is an apparent element of contradiction, which arrests attention and demands consideration. In the ministry of Jesus one finds it in such expressions as grown persons being born ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":16957,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Humility","title_en":"Humility","content_ro":"<h3>HUMILITY<\/h3>\n<p>A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical literature there is not a clear distinction between humility and meekness or patience. In early stages of Israel’s history, the humble were identified as the poor, the afflicted, and the powerless. The Lord delivers the humble but brings down the proud (1 Sm 2:7; 2 Sm 22:28). Before the power and glory of God, the patriarch Abraham confessed that he was but dust and ashes (Gn 18:27). Israel began as a nation subjected to slavery and knew themselves as a people chosen not because of numerical strength or material wealth but because of God’s love (Dt 7:7-8). By attributing the source of all wealth and power to the Lord, those two major sources of human pride and arrogance are brought under control (cf. Jer 9:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The humble poor are the constant concern of the Lord (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt 15:4, 7). Consequently, the humility of the poor became the symbol of the righteous God-fearer (Nm 12:3). In the development of the concept of humility in the OT, humility is nearly equated with righteousness and is identified, along with justice and mercy, as the requirement of God (Mi 6:8). In the Psalms particularly, “the afflicted” is almost a technical term for the righteous (Pss 22:26; 25:9; 147:6).<\/p>\n<p>In addition, humility is the appropriate response of the sinner in the presence of the holiness of God. The prophet Isaiah, confronted by the glory of God in the temple, cried, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man” (Is 6:5). Thus humility became more of a character trait than a term that reflected a state of material poverty or affliction. It became a concept reflective of the essence of piety and godliness expected of all people who have God as their Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Only rarely in the NT does humility refer to an objective condition of poverty, affliction, or oppression.The humility motif is developed in connection with Jesus as Messiah. The religious ideal of humility that the OT attributed to the coming King certainly applied to Jesus (Zec 9:9; cf. Mt 21:4-5). As Son of God, Jesus took no thought for himself but lived a life of obedience and trust in God the Father. The apostle Paul attributed to the incarnate Son of God a self-emptying by which he “humbled himself” and took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:5-8). Jesus’ character exhibited no pride or arrogance.<\/p>\n<p>Though bold in the face of hypocrisy and unflinching in his repudiation of pretentious religion, Jesus was “gentle and humble in heart” (Mt 11:29). He could, therefore, issue a severe warning against desire for status and openly rebuke the Pharisees for their violence against the poor and oppressed (Lk 14:11; Mt 23:12). At the same time, he was humble before those whose servant and helper he had become (Lk 22:27; Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28). The highest dignity of Jesus and his willingness to accept the cross in submission to the Father’s will are one. So his teaching on poverty of spirit rang true as a testimony of his own life. He ascribed all glory to his Father and lived in total dependence upon him (Jn 5:19; 6:38; 7:15; 8:28, 50; 14:10, 24). By washing his disciples’ feet, he assumed the role of servant with no loss of dignity or self-worth. And he set forth such service as a model of a life that finds happiness in preferring others over one’s self (Jn 13:1-20; Phil 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, disciples of Jesus are also summoned to a life of humility. Turning their backs on status, security, and success, Christians seek an opportunity to gain themselves in serving others. Humility, thus, is the all-embracing life principle by which love seeks the good of others, and thus fulfills the law (cf. Rom 12:10; 13:8-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HUMILITY<\/h3>\n<p>A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical literature there is not a clear distinction between humility and meekness or patience. In early stages of Israel’s history, the humble were identified as the poor, the afflicted, and the powerless. The Lord delivers the humble but brings down the proud (1 Sm 2:7; 2 Sm 22:28). Before the power and glory of God, the patriarch Abraham confessed that he was but dust and ashes (Gn 18:27). Israel began as a nation subjected to slavery and knew themselves as a people chosen not because of numerical strength or material wealth but because of God’s love (Dt 7:7-8). By attributing the source of all wealth and power to the Lord, those two major sources of human pride and arrogance are brought under control (cf. Jer 9:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The humble poor are the constant concern of the Lord (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt 15:4, 7). Consequently, the humility of the poor became the symbol of the righteous God-fearer (Nm 12:3). In the development of the concept of humility in the OT, humility is nearly equated with righteousness and is identified, along with justice and mercy, as the requirement of God (Mi 6:8). In the Psalms particularly, “the afflicted” is almost a technical term for the righteous (Pss 22:26; 25:9; 147:6).<\/p>\n<p>In addition, humility is the appropriate response of the sinner in the presence of the holiness of God. The prophet Isaiah, confronted by the glory of God in the temple, cried, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man” (Is 6:5). Thus humility became more of a character trait than a term that reflected a state of material poverty or affliction. It became a concept reflective of the essence of piety and godliness expected of all people who have God as their Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Only rarely in the NT does humility refer to an objective condition of poverty, affliction, or oppression.The humility motif is developed in connection with Jesus as Messiah. The religious ideal of humility that the OT attributed to the coming King certainly applied to Jesus (Zec 9:9; cf. Mt 21:4-5). As Son of God, Jesus took no thought for himself but lived a life of obedience and trust in God the Father. The apostle Paul attributed to the incarnate Son of God a self-emptying by which he “humbled himself” and took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:5-8). Jesus’ character exhibited no pride or arrogance.<\/p>\n<p>Though bold in the face of hypocrisy and unflinching in his repudiation of pretentious religion, Jesus was “gentle and humble in heart” (Mt 11:29). He could, therefore, issue a severe warning against desire for status and openly rebuke the Pharisees for their violence against the poor and oppressed (Lk 14:11; Mt 23:12). At the same time, he was humble before those whose servant and helper he had become (Lk 22:27; Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28). The highest dignity of Jesus and his willingness to accept the cross in submission to the Father’s will are one. So his teaching on poverty of spirit rang true as a testimony of his own life. He ascribed all glory to his Father and lived in total dependence upon him (Jn 5:19; 6:38; 7:15; 8:28, 50; 14:10, 24). By washing his disciples’ feet, he assumed the role of servant with no loss of dignity or self-worth. And he set forth such service as a model of a life that finds happiness in preferring others over one’s self (Jn 13:1-20; Phil 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, disciples of Jesus are also summoned to a life of humility. Turning their backs on status, security, and success, Christians seek an opportunity to gain themselves in serving others. Humility, thus, is the all-embracing life principle by which love seeks the good of others, and thus fulfills the law (cf. Rom 12:10; 13:8-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HUMILITY A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute depen...","summary_en":"HUMILITY A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute depen...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56211,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:27","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:27<\/strong> <em>For I am among you as one who serves:<\/em> Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:27<\/strong> <em>For I am among you as one who serves:<\/em> Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:27 For I am among you as one who serves: Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.","summary_en":"22:27 For I am among you as one who serves: Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83837,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:27","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:27<\/strong> <em>For I am among you as one who serves:<\/em> Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:27<\/strong> <em>For I am among you as one who serves:<\/em> Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:27 For I am among you as one who serves: Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.","summary_en":"22:27 For I am among you as one who serves: Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111463,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:27","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:27<\/strong> <em>For I am among you as one who serves:<\/em> Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:27<\/strong> <em>For I am among you as one who serves:<\/em> Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:27 For I am among you as one who serves: Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.","summary_en":"22:27 For I am among you as one who serves: Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139089,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:27","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:27<\/strong> <em>For I am among you as one who serves:<\/em> Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:27<\/strong> <em>For I am among you as one who serves:<\/em> Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:27 For I am among you as one who serves: Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.","summary_en":"22:27 For I am among you as one who serves: Jesus defined true leadership as service—meeting the needs of others and empowering them to be all that God has called them to be (see Mark 10:45). This statement was striking in a culture for which status and power were central.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":35572,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Sinlessness","title_en":"of Christ*, Sinlessness","content_ro":"<h3>SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The Scripture (quoted here from the <span>rsv<\/span>) leaves no question that Christ is regarded as sinless. He is declared to be the perfect Son of God in every respect. His human nature is holy, without any sin. This is repeatedly and explicitly affirmed in unmistakable terms. Paul states that Christ “knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21). Peter says “he committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pt 2:22); he calls him “righteous” (3:18). The writer to the Hebrews says that Christ is “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners” (Heb 7:26). James speaks of him as “the righteous man” (Jas 5:6), and John affirms that “in him there is no sin” (1 Jn 3:5). In the Gospels and in the apostolic preaching, Jesus is repeatedly witnessed to as the Holy Son of God, the Holy One of God, the Holy and Righteous One (Lk 1:35; Jn 6:69; Acts 3:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was able to ask his enemies with penetrating conviction, “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (Jn 8:46). He gives ample evidence of a holy self-consciousness throughout his entire lifetime. Numerous references and inferences are made to his exemption from the unrighteousness of sin and disobedience. He kept the entire law in every detail and in each respect (Rom 10:4; Heb 4:15). Pilate’s wife regarded Jesus as a righteous man, and Pilate himself spoke of him as an innocent man (Mt 27:19, 24). Even Judas realized that he himself had sinned by “betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4).<\/p>\n<p>The issue of Christ’s sinlessness is not confined merely to the fact that he did not commit any sin. There is a deeper theological significance to the question, which has to do with the issue of whether Christ was at all able to sin. Was it even possible for him to sin? This concern has been spoken of in theology as his impeccability (Christ was unable to sin), or on the contrary position, his peccability (Christ was able to sin, even though he did not exercise his will in this direction). The problems on both of these views appear immediately: If Christ was unable to sin, how could he really have been tempted (and we have ample data in Scripture concerning Jesus’ temptations)? If Christ could have sinned, even though he did not do so, does this mean that God can sin (for Christ was in every respect fully the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity)? It is useless to say that Jesus could have sinned with respect to his human nature but not so with respect to his divine nature, because this ignores the indissoluble unity of the person of the God-man. We may not separate the human nature from the divine nature, as though in his humanity he could have acted independently of his divinity. This was, in part, the error of the ancient Nestorian heretics. Whatever the Son of God does, he does with and in his entire divine-human nature.<\/p>\n<p>Essentially, there is no contradiction between being tempted and being unable to sin. Of course, it is difficult for us to imagine how this can be possible. This is because we are sinners and stand within the experiential knowledge of evil. Christ’s person is absolutely unique; we can little imagine how real were his temptations by the devil in the wilderness and throughout his life (Lk 22:28, 39-46), even though it was impossible for him to actually sin.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps an illustration may be helpful. Let us imagine there is an absolutely impregnable fortress that cannot be taken by the enemy as long as the defenses are maintained. (If we may, for the purpose of illustration, let us rule out the terrible destructive forces of modern warfare.) Because the fortress is incapable of being taken by assault and is in reality unconquerable, as long as the defenses are kept up, it does not mean that it cannot be besieged and furiously attacked. So it may be with respect to the reality of Christ’s temptations and his inability to sin as the Holy Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>His temptations were real. Therefore, “we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Heb 4:15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The Scripture (quoted here from the <span>rsv<\/span>) leaves no question that Christ is regarded as sinless. He is declared to be the perfect Son of God in every respect. His human nature is holy, without any sin. This is repeatedly and explicitly affirmed in unmistakable terms. Paul states that Christ “knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21). Peter says “he committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pt 2:22); he calls him “righteous” (3:18). The writer to the Hebrews says that Christ is “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners” (Heb 7:26). James speaks of him as “the righteous man” (Jas 5:6), and John affirms that “in him there is no sin” (1 Jn 3:5). In the Gospels and in the apostolic preaching, Jesus is repeatedly witnessed to as the Holy Son of God, the Holy One of God, the Holy and Righteous One (Lk 1:35; Jn 6:69; Acts 3:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was able to ask his enemies with penetrating conviction, “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (Jn 8:46). He gives ample evidence of a holy self-consciousness throughout his entire lifetime. Numerous references and inferences are made to his exemption from the unrighteousness of sin and disobedience. He kept the entire law in every detail and in each respect (Rom 10:4; Heb 4:15). Pilate’s wife regarded Jesus as a righteous man, and Pilate himself spoke of him as an innocent man (Mt 27:19, 24). Even Judas realized that he himself had sinned by “betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4).<\/p>\n<p>The issue of Christ’s sinlessness is not confined merely to the fact that he did not commit any sin. There is a deeper theological significance to the question, which has to do with the issue of whether Christ was at all able to sin. Was it even possible for him to sin? This concern has been spoken of in theology as his impeccability (Christ was unable to sin), or on the contrary position, his peccability (Christ was able to sin, even though he did not exercise his will in this direction). The problems on both of these views appear immediately: If Christ was unable to sin, how could he really have been tempted (and we have ample data in Scripture concerning Jesus’ temptations)? If Christ could have sinned, even though he did not do so, does this mean that God can sin (for Christ was in every respect fully the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity)? It is useless to say that Jesus could have sinned with respect to his human nature but not so with respect to his divine nature, because this ignores the indissoluble unity of the person of the God-man. We may not separate the human nature from the divine nature, as though in his humanity he could have acted independently of his divinity. This was, in part, the error of the ancient Nestorian heretics. Whatever the Son of God does, he does with and in his entire divine-human nature.<\/p>\n<p>Essentially, there is no contradiction between being tempted and being unable to sin. Of course, it is difficult for us to imagine how this can be possible. This is because we are sinners and stand within the experiential knowledge of evil. Christ’s person is absolutely unique; we can little imagine how real were his temptations by the devil in the wilderness and throughout his life (Lk 22:28, 39-46), even though it was impossible for him to actually sin.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps an illustration may be helpful. Let us imagine there is an absolutely impregnable fortress that cannot be taken by the enemy as long as the defenses are maintained. (If we may, for the purpose of illustration, let us rule out the terrible destructive forces of modern warfare.) Because the fortress is incapable of being taken by assault and is in reality unconquerable, as long as the defenses are kept up, it does not mean that it cannot be besieged and furiously attacked. So it may be with respect to the reality of Christ’s temptations and his inability to sin as the Holy Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>His temptations were real. Therefore, “we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Heb 4:15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST* The Scripture (quoted here from the rsv) leaves no question that Christ is regarded as sinless. He is declared to be the perfect Son of God in every respect. His human nature is holy, without any sin. This is repeatedly and explicitly affirmed in unmistakable terms. Paul states that Christ “knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21). Peter says “he committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pt 2:22); he calls him “righteous” (3:18). The writer to the Hebrews says that Christ i...","summary_en":"SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST* The Scripture (quoted here from the rsv) leaves no question that Christ is regarded as sinless. He is declared to be the perfect Son of God in every respect. His human nature is holy, without any sin. This is repeatedly and explicitly affirmed in unmistakable terms. Paul states that Christ “knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21). Peter says “he committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pt 2:22); he calls him “righteous” (3:18). The writer to the Hebrews says that Christ i...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65745,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messianic Banquet","title_en":"The Messianic Banquet","content_ro":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","summary_en":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66028,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93371,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messianic Banquet","title_en":"The Messianic Banquet","content_ro":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","summary_en":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93654,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120997,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messianic Banquet","title_en":"The Messianic Banquet","content_ro":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","summary_en":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121280,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148623,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messianic Banquet","title_en":"The Messianic Banquet","content_ro":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","summary_en":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148906,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":56212,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:29","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:29-30<\/strong> <em>I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table:<\/em> See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:29-30<\/strong> <em>I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table:<\/em> See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:29-30 I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table: See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.","summary_en":"22:29-30 I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table: See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83838,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:29","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:29-30<\/strong> <em>I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table:<\/em> See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:29-30<\/strong> <em>I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table:<\/em> See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:29-30 I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table: See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.","summary_en":"22:29-30 I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table: See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111464,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:29","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:29-30<\/strong> <em>I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table:<\/em> See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:29-30<\/strong> <em>I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table:<\/em> See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:29-30 I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table: See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.","summary_en":"22:29-30 I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table: See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139090,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:29","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:29-30<\/strong> <em>I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table:<\/em> See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:29-30<\/strong> <em>I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table:<\/em> See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:29-30 I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table: See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.","summary_en":"22:29-30 I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table: See “The Messianic Banquet” Theme Note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"30":[{"id":21878,"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":31606,"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":56213,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:30<\/strong> <em>you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel:<\/em> This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:30<\/strong> <em>you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel:<\/em> This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:30 you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).","summary_en":"22:30 you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83839,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:30<\/strong> <em>you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel:<\/em> This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:30<\/strong> <em>you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel:<\/em> This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:30 you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).","summary_en":"22:30 you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111465,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:30<\/strong> <em>you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel:<\/em> This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:30<\/strong> <em>you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel:<\/em> This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:30 you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).","summary_en":"22:30 you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139091,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:30","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:30<\/strong> <em>you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel:<\/em> This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:30<\/strong> <em>you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel:<\/em> This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:30 you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).","summary_en":"22:30 you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: This could be a figurative reference to the apostles’ leadership in the church, or it could indicate their special role in the future when the Kingdom would be consummated on earth (cp. Eph 2:20; Rev 3:21; 20:4).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65749,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messianic Banquet","title_en":"The Messianic Banquet","content_ro":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","summary_en":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93375,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messianic Banquet","title_en":"The Messianic Banquet","content_ro":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","summary_en":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121001,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messianic Banquet","title_en":"The Messianic Banquet","content_ro":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","summary_en":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148627,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messianic Banquet","title_en":"The Messianic Banquet","content_ro":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messianic Banquet<\/h3>\n<p>Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-41; 14:1-6). Jesus also used imagery of feasting and banquets in his teaching and parables (5:33-35; 12:35-38; 14:7-14, 15-24; 17:7-10; 22:28-30). And he fed vast multitudes with a few loaves and fishes (9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament background to this feasting imagery is Isa 25:6, where God’s final salvation is described as a great feast for all people: “The <span>Lord<\/span> of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet, with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat” (see also Isa 65:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ public ministry marked the invitation to the banquet and its inauguration. Through his death and resurrection, he achieved salvation. All people can now come to God’s banquet table and receive the spiritual blessings of the Kingdom. At the same time, this banquet awaits its final consummation in the future Kingdom, when Jesus’ disciples will “eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom” and “sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30; see also Rev 19:7-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 25:6; 65:13-14; Luke 5:29-35; 6:21; 7:36-50; 9:10-17; 11:37-41; 12:35-40; 13:24-30; 14:1-24; 17:8; 22:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","summary_en":"The Messianic Banquet Through his teaching and miracles, Jesus announced that the messianic banquet was about to be served. All may come and feast at the table of salvation in God’s Kingdom. Jesus described his ministry as a wedding feast, with himself as the groom (Luke 5:33-35) and the Kingdom of God as a great banquet. All were invited, but some refused to come (Luke 14:15-24; see also Matt 8:11-12). Jesus often ate with diverse people, from despised tax collectors to pious Pharisees (5:29...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":41844,"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":42132,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69470,"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":69758,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97096,"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":97384,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124722,"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":125010,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17634,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Intercession","title_en":"of Christ*, Intercession","content_ro":"<h3>INTERCESSION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “meet,” “approach,” or “make an appeal.” In intertestamental literature that word was employed in the sense of personally petitioning an official to gain a favor (e.g., 2 Macc 4:8). The noun form of the word is translated in the NT both as “intercession” (1 Tm 2:1) and as “prayer” (4:5).<\/p>\n<p>Theologians generally see intercession as the second phase of Christ’s “high priestly work,” after he first made satisfaction for sin through his suffering and death on the cross (1 Tm 2:5-6). In the OT one of the priest’s functions was to petition God on the people’s behalf. In particular, on the annual Day of Atonement the high priest carried the blood of the sin offering into the Holy of Holies, sanctified the sacred place by means of incense, and sprinkled the sacrificial blood on and about the “mercy seat” (Lv 16:11-19). Correspondingly, after Christ offered himself on the cross as the sacrifice for sins, he ascended to the Father and entered the heavenly sanctuary where he now represents his people (Heb 7:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessiononEarth\">Christ’s Intercession on Earth<\/p>\n<p>Before his life of intercession in heaven, Jesus Christ exercised such a ministry on earth, consistent with his own teaching that the disciples should always pray and not get discouraged (Lk 18:1). Scripture often points to Jesus in prayer. For example, Jesus interceded at the grave of his friend Lazarus (Jn 11:41-42). Jesus prayed all night on a mountain before selecting the 12 apostles (Lk 6:12-13). After warning his disciple Peter that Satan had designs on him, Jesus said to Peter, “I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ first words on the cross were a prayer for those who had persecuted him (23:34).<\/p>\n<p>The “high priestly prayer” recorded in John 17 provides the most complete account in Scripture of an intercessory prayer by Jesus. The ground, or basis, of his impassioned petition was his intimate relationship with his heavenly Father (Jn 17:5, 8). The objects of his prayer were (1) himself, that he might glorify the Father and complete the work he had been sent to accomplish (Jn 17:1-5); (2) his disciples, who were chosen to spread the gospel after his departure (vv 8-9); and (3) the entire family of believers (v 20). The goals of his intercession included (1) the unity of God’s people (vv 11, 21), (2) their joy in spite of hardships and discouragement (v 13), (3) their preservation from evil (v 15), (4) their sanctification by the Word of God (v 17), and (5) their eternal fellowship with Christ (v 24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessioninHeaven\">Christ’s Intercession in Heaven<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s intercession for his people, begun on earth, is continued in heaven. The Epistle to the Hebrews depicts Christ as a priest, placing considerable emphasis on his continuing ministry of intercession. Christ’s heavenly intercession is a sequel to his earthly sacrifice accomplished “once for all” (Heb 10:10-18). Jesus himself said, “Every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 10:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). His continuing intercession is recognized in such NT phrases as “through Jesus Christ” (Rom 1:8; 16:27; 1 Pt 2:5), “through him” (Col 3:17; Heb 13:15), and “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Eph 5:20).<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of Christ’s heavenly intercession is explicitly affirmed in four NT texts. The apostle Paul spoke of Christ “at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us” (Rom 8:34, <span>rsv<\/span>). The writer of Hebrews affirmed that Christ “is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb 7:25, <span>rsv<\/span>). Further, Christ has entered “into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf” (9:24). The apostle John also described that ministry: “If any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 Jn 2:1). The Greek word for “advocate” meant a legal counselor who appeared before a magistrate to plead a client’s cause. John thus pictured the ascended Lord as appearing before God on behalf of his people, presenting his own obedience and suffering as the ground for the believer’s acquittal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWayIntercessionWorks\">The Way Intercession Works<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s heavenly intercession has both a static aspect (his redemptive work has been completed) and a dynamic aspect (he continues to care for God’s people). Thus Christ’s intercession is seen as including (1) his presence with the Father as the ground of each believer’s justification (Heb 9:24); (2) his thwarting of Satan’s accusations against each believer (Rom 8:33; Rv 12:10); (3) his claim for each believer’s right of access to the divine presence (Heb 4:14-16); and (4) his mediation of the prayers of each believer. The heavenly Father’s response is to impart the full range of spiritual blessings on believers. In the words of the Puritan John Owen (1616–83), “The intercession of Christ . . . is his continual appearance for us in the presence of God, representing the efficacy of his oblation, accompanied with tender care, love and desires for the welfare, supply, deliverance and salvation of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>Those for whom Christ intercedes in heaven are described in Scripture both broadly and narrowly. Christ is said to pray for all people everywhere (Is 53:12; cf. Mt 26:28). More specifically, and perhaps more profoundly, he prays for his own redeemed community, the church (Jn 14:16; 17:9, 20; Heb 4:15-16). Nevertheless, Christ’s prayers are also centered on the specific needs of individual believers (Lk 22:31-32; 1 Jn 2:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INTERCESSION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “meet,” “approach,” or “make an appeal.” In intertestamental literature that word was employed in the sense of personally petitioning an official to gain a favor (e.g., 2 Macc 4:8). The noun form of the word is translated in the NT both as “intercession” (1 Tm 2:1) and as “prayer” (4:5).<\/p>\n<p>Theologians generally see intercession as the second phase of Christ’s “high priestly work,” after he first made satisfaction for sin through his suffering and death on the cross (1 Tm 2:5-6). In the OT one of the priest’s functions was to petition God on the people’s behalf. In particular, on the annual Day of Atonement the high priest carried the blood of the sin offering into the Holy of Holies, sanctified the sacred place by means of incense, and sprinkled the sacrificial blood on and about the “mercy seat” (Lv 16:11-19). Correspondingly, after Christ offered himself on the cross as the sacrifice for sins, he ascended to the Father and entered the heavenly sanctuary where he now represents his people (Heb 7:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessiononEarth\">Christ’s Intercession on Earth<\/p>\n<p>Before his life of intercession in heaven, Jesus Christ exercised such a ministry on earth, consistent with his own teaching that the disciples should always pray and not get discouraged (Lk 18:1). Scripture often points to Jesus in prayer. For example, Jesus interceded at the grave of his friend Lazarus (Jn 11:41-42). Jesus prayed all night on a mountain before selecting the 12 apostles (Lk 6:12-13). After warning his disciple Peter that Satan had designs on him, Jesus said to Peter, “I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ first words on the cross were a prayer for those who had persecuted him (23:34).<\/p>\n<p>The “high priestly prayer” recorded in John 17 provides the most complete account in Scripture of an intercessory prayer by Jesus. The ground, or basis, of his impassioned petition was his intimate relationship with his heavenly Father (Jn 17:5, 8). The objects of his prayer were (1) himself, that he might glorify the Father and complete the work he had been sent to accomplish (Jn 17:1-5); (2) his disciples, who were chosen to spread the gospel after his departure (vv 8-9); and (3) the entire family of believers (v 20). The goals of his intercession included (1) the unity of God’s people (vv 11, 21), (2) their joy in spite of hardships and discouragement (v 13), (3) their preservation from evil (v 15), (4) their sanctification by the Word of God (v 17), and (5) their eternal fellowship with Christ (v 24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessioninHeaven\">Christ’s Intercession in Heaven<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s intercession for his people, begun on earth, is continued in heaven. The Epistle to the Hebrews depicts Christ as a priest, placing considerable emphasis on his continuing ministry of intercession. Christ’s heavenly intercession is a sequel to his earthly sacrifice accomplished “once for all” (Heb 10:10-18). Jesus himself said, “Every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 10:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). His continuing intercession is recognized in such NT phrases as “through Jesus Christ” (Rom 1:8; 16:27; 1 Pt 2:5), “through him” (Col 3:17; Heb 13:15), and “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Eph 5:20).<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of Christ’s heavenly intercession is explicitly affirmed in four NT texts. The apostle Paul spoke of Christ “at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us” (Rom 8:34, <span>rsv<\/span>). The writer of Hebrews affirmed that Christ “is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb 7:25, <span>rsv<\/span>). Further, Christ has entered “into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf” (9:24). The apostle John also described that ministry: “If any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 Jn 2:1). The Greek word for “advocate” meant a legal counselor who appeared before a magistrate to plead a client’s cause. John thus pictured the ascended Lord as appearing before God on behalf of his people, presenting his own obedience and suffering as the ground for the believer’s acquittal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWayIntercessionWorks\">The Way Intercession Works<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s heavenly intercession has both a static aspect (his redemptive work has been completed) and a dynamic aspect (he continues to care for God’s people). Thus Christ’s intercession is seen as including (1) his presence with the Father as the ground of each believer’s justification (Heb 9:24); (2) his thwarting of Satan’s accusations against each believer (Rom 8:33; Rv 12:10); (3) his claim for each believer’s right of access to the divine presence (Heb 4:14-16); and (4) his mediation of the prayers of each believer. The heavenly Father’s response is to impart the full range of spiritual blessings on believers. In the words of the Puritan John Owen (1616–83), “The intercession of Christ . . . is his continual appearance for us in the presence of God, representing the efficacy of his oblation, accompanied with tender care, love and desires for the welfare, supply, deliverance and salvation of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>Those for whom Christ intercedes in heaven are described in Scripture both broadly and narrowly. Christ is said to pray for all people everywhere (Is 53:12; cf. Mt 26:28). More specifically, and perhaps more profoundly, he prays for his own redeemed community, the church (Jn 14:16; 17:9, 20; Heb 4:15-16). Nevertheless, Christ’s prayers are also centered on the specific needs of individual believers (Lk 22:31-32; 1 Jn 2:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"INTERCESSION OF CHRIST* Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth. The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, rsv). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “mee...","summary_en":"INTERCESSION OF CHRIST* Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth. The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, rsv). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “mee...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56214,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:31","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:31<\/strong> Regarding <em>Satan<\/em>, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • <em>asked to sift:<\/em> Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s <em>each of you<\/em> is precise, because the Greek <em>you<\/em> is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:31<\/strong> Regarding <em>Satan<\/em>, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • <em>asked to sift:<\/em> Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s <em>each of you<\/em> is precise, because the Greek <em>you<\/em> is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:31 Regarding Satan, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • asked to sift: Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s each of you is precise, because the Greek you is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.","summary_en":"22:31 Regarding Satan, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • asked to sift: Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s each of you is precise, because the Greek you is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83840,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:31","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:31<\/strong> Regarding <em>Satan<\/em>, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • <em>asked to sift:<\/em> Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s <em>each of you<\/em> is precise, because the Greek <em>you<\/em> is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:31<\/strong> Regarding <em>Satan<\/em>, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • <em>asked to sift:<\/em> Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s <em>each of you<\/em> is precise, because the Greek <em>you<\/em> is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:31 Regarding Satan, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • asked to sift: Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s each of you is precise, because the Greek you is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.","summary_en":"22:31 Regarding Satan, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • asked to sift: Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s each of you is precise, because the Greek you is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111466,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:31","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:31<\/strong> Regarding <em>Satan<\/em>, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • <em>asked to sift:<\/em> Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s <em>each of you<\/em> is precise, because the Greek <em>you<\/em> is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:31<\/strong> Regarding <em>Satan<\/em>, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • <em>asked to sift:<\/em> Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s <em>each of you<\/em> is precise, because the Greek <em>you<\/em> is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:31 Regarding Satan, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • asked to sift: Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s each of you is precise, because the Greek you is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.","summary_en":"22:31 Regarding Satan, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • asked to sift: Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s each of you is precise, because the Greek you is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139092,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:31","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:31<\/strong> Regarding <em>Satan<\/em>, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • <em>asked to sift:<\/em> Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s <em>each of you<\/em> is precise, because the Greek <em>you<\/em> is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:31<\/strong> Regarding <em>Satan<\/em>, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • <em>asked to sift:<\/em> Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s <em>each of you<\/em> is precise, because the Greek <em>you<\/em> is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:31 Regarding Satan, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • asked to sift: Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s each of you is precise, because the Greek you is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.","summary_en":"22:31 Regarding Satan, see 4:2; 10:18; 11:15. Satan is the accuser of God’s people (see Job 1:7; 2:2); he would test Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles. • asked to sift: Wheat was sifted through a sieve to separate the grain from the chaff. It is an image of extreme testing (see Isa 30:28; Amos 9:9). • The NLT’s each of you is precise, because the Greek you is plural, referring to all the disciples. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denial and the trials of the other disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65078,"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":92704,"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":120330,"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":147956,"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}],"32":[{"id":17605,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Intercession","title_en":"of Christ*, Intercession","content_ro":"<h3>INTERCESSION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “meet,” “approach,” or “make an appeal.” In intertestamental literature that word was employed in the sense of personally petitioning an official to gain a favor (e.g., 2 Macc 4:8). The noun form of the word is translated in the NT both as “intercession” (1 Tm 2:1) and as “prayer” (4:5).<\/p>\n<p>Theologians generally see intercession as the second phase of Christ’s “high priestly work,” after he first made satisfaction for sin through his suffering and death on the cross (1 Tm 2:5-6). In the OT one of the priest’s functions was to petition God on the people’s behalf. In particular, on the annual Day of Atonement the high priest carried the blood of the sin offering into the Holy of Holies, sanctified the sacred place by means of incense, and sprinkled the sacrificial blood on and about the “mercy seat” (Lv 16:11-19). Correspondingly, after Christ offered himself on the cross as the sacrifice for sins, he ascended to the Father and entered the heavenly sanctuary where he now represents his people (Heb 7:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessiononEarth\">Christ’s Intercession on Earth<\/p>\n<p>Before his life of intercession in heaven, Jesus Christ exercised such a ministry on earth, consistent with his own teaching that the disciples should always pray and not get discouraged (Lk 18:1). Scripture often points to Jesus in prayer. For example, Jesus interceded at the grave of his friend Lazarus (Jn 11:41-42). Jesus prayed all night on a mountain before selecting the 12 apostles (Lk 6:12-13). After warning his disciple Peter that Satan had designs on him, Jesus said to Peter, “I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ first words on the cross were a prayer for those who had persecuted him (23:34).<\/p>\n<p>The “high priestly prayer” recorded in John 17 provides the most complete account in Scripture of an intercessory prayer by Jesus. The ground, or basis, of his impassioned petition was his intimate relationship with his heavenly Father (Jn 17:5, 8). The objects of his prayer were (1) himself, that he might glorify the Father and complete the work he had been sent to accomplish (Jn 17:1-5); (2) his disciples, who were chosen to spread the gospel after his departure (vv 8-9); and (3) the entire family of believers (v 20). The goals of his intercession included (1) the unity of God’s people (vv 11, 21), (2) their joy in spite of hardships and discouragement (v 13), (3) their preservation from evil (v 15), (4) their sanctification by the Word of God (v 17), and (5) their eternal fellowship with Christ (v 24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessioninHeaven\">Christ’s Intercession in Heaven<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s intercession for his people, begun on earth, is continued in heaven. The Epistle to the Hebrews depicts Christ as a priest, placing considerable emphasis on his continuing ministry of intercession. Christ’s heavenly intercession is a sequel to his earthly sacrifice accomplished “once for all” (Heb 10:10-18). Jesus himself said, “Every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 10:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). His continuing intercession is recognized in such NT phrases as “through Jesus Christ” (Rom 1:8; 16:27; 1 Pt 2:5), “through him” (Col 3:17; Heb 13:15), and “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Eph 5:20).<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of Christ’s heavenly intercession is explicitly affirmed in four NT texts. The apostle Paul spoke of Christ “at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us” (Rom 8:34, <span>rsv<\/span>). The writer of Hebrews affirmed that Christ “is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb 7:25, <span>rsv<\/span>). Further, Christ has entered “into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf” (9:24). The apostle John also described that ministry: “If any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 Jn 2:1). The Greek word for “advocate” meant a legal counselor who appeared before a magistrate to plead a client’s cause. John thus pictured the ascended Lord as appearing before God on behalf of his people, presenting his own obedience and suffering as the ground for the believer’s acquittal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWayIntercessionWorks\">The Way Intercession Works<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s heavenly intercession has both a static aspect (his redemptive work has been completed) and a dynamic aspect (he continues to care for God’s people). Thus Christ’s intercession is seen as including (1) his presence with the Father as the ground of each believer’s justification (Heb 9:24); (2) his thwarting of Satan’s accusations against each believer (Rom 8:33; Rv 12:10); (3) his claim for each believer’s right of access to the divine presence (Heb 4:14-16); and (4) his mediation of the prayers of each believer. The heavenly Father’s response is to impart the full range of spiritual blessings on believers. In the words of the Puritan John Owen (1616–83), “The intercession of Christ . . . is his continual appearance for us in the presence of God, representing the efficacy of his oblation, accompanied with tender care, love and desires for the welfare, supply, deliverance and salvation of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>Those for whom Christ intercedes in heaven are described in Scripture both broadly and narrowly. Christ is said to pray for all people everywhere (Is 53:12; cf. Mt 26:28). More specifically, and perhaps more profoundly, he prays for his own redeemed community, the church (Jn 14:16; 17:9, 20; Heb 4:15-16). Nevertheless, Christ’s prayers are also centered on the specific needs of individual believers (Lk 22:31-32; 1 Jn 2:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INTERCESSION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “meet,” “approach,” or “make an appeal.” In intertestamental literature that word was employed in the sense of personally petitioning an official to gain a favor (e.g., 2 Macc 4:8). The noun form of the word is translated in the NT both as “intercession” (1 Tm 2:1) and as “prayer” (4:5).<\/p>\n<p>Theologians generally see intercession as the second phase of Christ’s “high priestly work,” after he first made satisfaction for sin through his suffering and death on the cross (1 Tm 2:5-6). In the OT one of the priest’s functions was to petition God on the people’s behalf. In particular, on the annual Day of Atonement the high priest carried the blood of the sin offering into the Holy of Holies, sanctified the sacred place by means of incense, and sprinkled the sacrificial blood on and about the “mercy seat” (Lv 16:11-19). Correspondingly, after Christ offered himself on the cross as the sacrifice for sins, he ascended to the Father and entered the heavenly sanctuary where he now represents his people (Heb 7:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessiononEarth\">Christ’s Intercession on Earth<\/p>\n<p>Before his life of intercession in heaven, Jesus Christ exercised such a ministry on earth, consistent with his own teaching that the disciples should always pray and not get discouraged (Lk 18:1). Scripture often points to Jesus in prayer. For example, Jesus interceded at the grave of his friend Lazarus (Jn 11:41-42). Jesus prayed all night on a mountain before selecting the 12 apostles (Lk 6:12-13). After warning his disciple Peter that Satan had designs on him, Jesus said to Peter, “I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ first words on the cross were a prayer for those who had persecuted him (23:34).<\/p>\n<p>The “high priestly prayer” recorded in John 17 provides the most complete account in Scripture of an intercessory prayer by Jesus. The ground, or basis, of his impassioned petition was his intimate relationship with his heavenly Father (Jn 17:5, 8). The objects of his prayer were (1) himself, that he might glorify the Father and complete the work he had been sent to accomplish (Jn 17:1-5); (2) his disciples, who were chosen to spread the gospel after his departure (vv 8-9); and (3) the entire family of believers (v 20). The goals of his intercession included (1) the unity of God’s people (vv 11, 21), (2) their joy in spite of hardships and discouragement (v 13), (3) their preservation from evil (v 15), (4) their sanctification by the Word of God (v 17), and (5) their eternal fellowship with Christ (v 24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessioninHeaven\">Christ’s Intercession in Heaven<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s intercession for his people, begun on earth, is continued in heaven. The Epistle to the Hebrews depicts Christ as a priest, placing considerable emphasis on his continuing ministry of intercession. Christ’s heavenly intercession is a sequel to his earthly sacrifice accomplished “once for all” (Heb 10:10-18). Jesus himself said, “Every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 10:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). His continuing intercession is recognized in such NT phrases as “through Jesus Christ” (Rom 1:8; 16:27; 1 Pt 2:5), “through him” (Col 3:17; Heb 13:15), and “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Eph 5:20).<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of Christ’s heavenly intercession is explicitly affirmed in four NT texts. The apostle Paul spoke of Christ “at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us” (Rom 8:34, <span>rsv<\/span>). The writer of Hebrews affirmed that Christ “is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb 7:25, <span>rsv<\/span>). Further, Christ has entered “into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf” (9:24). The apostle John also described that ministry: “If any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 Jn 2:1). The Greek word for “advocate” meant a legal counselor who appeared before a magistrate to plead a client’s cause. John thus pictured the ascended Lord as appearing before God on behalf of his people, presenting his own obedience and suffering as the ground for the believer’s acquittal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWayIntercessionWorks\">The Way Intercession Works<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s heavenly intercession has both a static aspect (his redemptive work has been completed) and a dynamic aspect (he continues to care for God’s people). Thus Christ’s intercession is seen as including (1) his presence with the Father as the ground of each believer’s justification (Heb 9:24); (2) his thwarting of Satan’s accusations against each believer (Rom 8:33; Rv 12:10); (3) his claim for each believer’s right of access to the divine presence (Heb 4:14-16); and (4) his mediation of the prayers of each believer. The heavenly Father’s response is to impart the full range of spiritual blessings on believers. In the words of the Puritan John Owen (1616–83), “The intercession of Christ . . . is his continual appearance for us in the presence of God, representing the efficacy of his oblation, accompanied with tender care, love and desires for the welfare, supply, deliverance and salvation of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>Those for whom Christ intercedes in heaven are described in Scripture both broadly and narrowly. Christ is said to pray for all people everywhere (Is 53:12; cf. Mt 26:28). More specifically, and perhaps more profoundly, he prays for his own redeemed community, the church (Jn 14:16; 17:9, 20; Heb 4:15-16). Nevertheless, Christ’s prayers are also centered on the specific needs of individual believers (Lk 22:31-32; 1 Jn 2:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"INTERCESSION OF CHRIST* Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth. The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, rsv). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “mee...","summary_en":"INTERCESSION OF CHRIST* Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth. The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, rsv). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “mee...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56215,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:32","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:32<\/strong> <em>So when you have repented:<\/em> This <em>you<\/em> is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:32<\/strong> <em>So when you have repented:<\/em> This <em>you<\/em> is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:32 So when you have repented: This you is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.","summary_en":"22:32 So when you have repented: This you is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83841,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:32","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:32<\/strong> <em>So when you have repented:<\/em> This <em>you<\/em> is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:32<\/strong> <em>So when you have repented:<\/em> This <em>you<\/em> is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:32 So when you have repented: This you is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.","summary_en":"22:32 So when you have repented: This you is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111467,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:32","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:32<\/strong> <em>So when you have repented:<\/em> This <em>you<\/em> is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:32<\/strong> <em>So when you have repented:<\/em> This <em>you<\/em> is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:32 So when you have repented: This you is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.","summary_en":"22:32 So when you have repented: This you is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139093,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:32","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:32<\/strong> <em>So when you have repented:<\/em> This <em>you<\/em> is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:32<\/strong> <em>So when you have repented:<\/em> This <em>you<\/em> is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:32 So when you have repented: This you is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.","summary_en":"22:32 So when you have repented: This you is singular; it refers to Peter’s restoration after his denial of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65721,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93347,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120973,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148599,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"33":[{"id":42120,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69746,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97372,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124998,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56216,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:33","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:33<\/strong> See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:33<\/strong> See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:33 See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.","summary_en":"22:33 See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83842,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:33","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:33<\/strong> See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:33<\/strong> See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:33 See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.","summary_en":"22:33 See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111468,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:33","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:33<\/strong> See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:33<\/strong> See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:33 See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.","summary_en":"22:33 See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139094,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:33","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:33<\/strong> See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:33<\/strong> See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:33 See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.","summary_en":"22:33 See Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1-9, where Peter suffered trials and was repeatedly jailed. Church tradition relates that Peter was crucified in Rome, but his declaration of loyalty here was premature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":5050,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Birds","title_en":"Birds","content_ro":"<h3>BIRDS<\/h3>\n\n<p>Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult or impossible. The biblical languages were not highly specialized scientific languages. People in biblical times generally knew the difference between similar animals now categorized as separate species. For birds, however, they frequently used poetic, descriptive terms. Biblical scholars attempt to overcome the difficulties in identification by comparing the Hebrew words with similar words in related languages and by attention to the habitat, habits, and characteristics attributed to the birds in Scripture. Nevertheless, different scholars sometimes arrive at different identifications.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalReferencestoBirds\">Biblical References to Birds<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to birds both in literal and figurative senses. The biblical writers were keen observers of nature, their awareness of birds and bird life being reflected in many passages. They asserted that God knows all the birds (Ps 50:11) and cares for them (Mt 10:29). They saw God’s covenant with Noah after the flood, his promise never to destroy life again by flood, as extending even to the birds and animals (Gn 9:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law declared many birds “unclean,” mostly species that were scavengers or predators, or inhabited waste places. Centuries later the early Christians came to regard unclean species as clean by God’s decree, revealed in the apostle Peter’s vision (Acts 10:12). Other birds, like quail, sustained the Israelites in their wanderings (Ex 16:13). The Law prescribed birds as sacrifices for a firstborn child (Lk 2:24), for a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10), for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:22), and as a burnt offering and sin offering (12:8).<\/p>\n<p>Birds are easily subject to extinction, especially through human activity. God required the Israelites to practice conservation to prevent any birds from becoming extinct in the Holy Land, both for the birds’ sake and so the Israelites would have a continuous source of food. The Law allowed foraging Israelites to take eggs or the young from a bird’s nest, but they were not permitted to kill both a mother bird and her young (Dt 22:6).<\/p>\n<p>Biblical writers turned to nature frequently for illustrations of divine principles or human characteristics. Comparisons of humans to birds sometimes carry a sense of lowness, as when King Nebuchadnezzar developed claws like a bird in his madness (Dn 4:33), or when Job remarked that birds did not know the source of wisdom (Jb 28:21). In Jesus’ parable of the sower, the birds that ate the seed scattered by the wayside may represent indifference and a lack of spiritual understanding (Mt 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture also contains sympathetic images of the plight of birds. A lonely man praying was likened to a lonely bird on a housetop (Ps 102:7). If someone was unjustly hunted by his enemies, he would understand a hunted bird’s plight (Lam 3:52). Birds were said to be affected by curses on evildoers as they fled from Jerusalem or from the face of the earth (Jer 9:10; Zep 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of such misfortune visited upon birds, Scripture affirms that, like other creatures, they are cared for and delighted in by God (Ps 50:11; Mt 6:26; 10:29). Both Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar were compared to a tree that gives shelter to the birds (Ez 31:6; Dn 4:12; cf. 2:38). Human power, however, fails eventually as when the tree representing Nebuchadnezzar was cut down, forcing the birds to flee (Dn 4:14). God’s protection, by contrast, is unfailing. Jesus likened the kingdom of God to a mustard seed, growing to become a shelter for birds (Mt 13:32). God provides a habitation for birds (Ps 104:12), although Jesus, the Son of Man, had nowhere to rest his head (Mt 8:20).<\/p>\n<p>Birds were considered evidence of God’s handiwork (Jb 12:7). Bird lore provided examples of good sense in learning from a mistake (Prv 1:17; 6:5) and of bad judgment in failing to avoid the snares of immorality (7:23). Birds and other creatures could be tamed, unlike the wicked human tongue (Jas 3:7). Birds flying without alighting were an image of an undeserved curse (Prv 26:2). Without trust in God, people might be forced by evil to flee like a bird to the mountains (Ps 11:1). Birdsong was said to bring joy (Sg 2:12). The return of God’s people to the Promised Land would be like birds returning (Hos 11:11). Jesus expressed his love for Jerusalem by saying that he longed to gather his people to himself as a hen gathers her brood under her wing (Mt 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, birds were occasionally regarded as ominous signs. For example, Pharaoh’s baker learned of impending death because in a dream birds ate the food from a basket on his head (Gn 40:17). Solomon warned against cursing the king, even in private, because “a little bird may tell them what you said” (Eccl 10:20). A vivid biblical image is that of scavenging, carrion-eating birds consuming the bodies of evildoers. To the Israelites, such a desecration of humanity was an image of ultimate horror (Dt 28:26; 1 Sm 17:44; Is 46:11; Jer 7:33; 12:9; Ez 29:5; 39:4; Rv 19:17, 21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IndividualSpecies\">Individual Species<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Bittern\">Bittern<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged wading bird <em>(Botaurus stellaris)<\/em> similar to the heron, but with shorter legs and a smaller, more compact body. Bitterns inhabit marshes, where it is easy for them to hide with their natural camouflage. A bittern’s mottled plumage of barred brown and black so duplicates the color and shape of swamp vegetation that at times the bird seems to disappear before the observer’s eyes. The neck is covered with long, soft feathers, making it appear disproportionately heavy. Bitterns are wary and solitary. During mating season the bittern’s larynx is modified to produce a mysterious-sounding cry. The body twists in an unusual manner in harmony with the notes. Bitterns nest alone in grassy marshes. Because they are shy, they have become symbols of places of desolation and loneliness.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the bittern is actually mentioned in the Bible. The <span>kjv<\/span> has “bittern” in three places (Is 14:23; 34:11; Zep 2:14). Many biblical scholars believe the Hebrew word in those verses refers not to the bittern but to the hedgehog (Is 14:23; Zep 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>) or porcupine (Is 34:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). The Hebrew word is similar to an Arabic word meaning “porcupine.” Other scholars point out that the references suggest a bird rather than a mammal, especially Zephaniah 2:14, which speaks of the creature making its “lodge in her capitals” (i.e., above Nineveh’s doorposts). Bitterns are particularly abundant in the swamps of the Tigris River (near Nineveh). The bittern’s characteristics may fit the references in the three passages better than do the hedgehog’s.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hedgehog; Animals (Porcupine).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Buzzard\">Buzzard<\/p>\n<p>Hawklike soaring bird <em>(Buteo vulgaris<\/em> or <em>Buteo ferox).<\/em> It resembles the kite, though its tail is straight and not cleft. It is mentioned in the list of unclean birds (Dt 14:13). But other translations render the word as “glede” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “kite” (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). The parallel list in Leviticus 11, however, substitutes “kite” (<span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>) or “vulture” (<span>kjv<\/span>) for “buzzard.” Thus, it is difficult to determine whether the buzzard is actually mentioned in the Bible, even though it is a common resident of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Like other great soaring birds, the buzzard is noted for its sharp eyesight, and may be the bird mentioned for that quality in Job 28:7 (variously translated “falcon,” “eagle,” or “vulture”). It will trail its prey for hours, and has a remarkable ability to see a carcass on which it descends to feed. Somewhat larger than the common buzzard is the long-legged buzzard, found in Israel, western Asia, and Syria.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kestrel; Kite; Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cormorant\">Cormorant<\/p>\n<p>Large, black gooselike bird <em>(Phalacrocorax carbo),<\/em> repeatedly depicted in art from Egypt and the Holy Land. Its length varies from 19 to 40 inches (48.3 to 101.6 centimeters). Its feet have webs between all four toes. The feet, attached far back on the body, serve as propellers when the cormorant dives to catch its meal of fish, crustacea, or amphibia. The long bill is curved at the tip, and under the bill is a sac in which the cormorant keeps the captured fish.<\/p>\n<p>Cormorants live in large companies, making nests of sticks and other vegetation that they carry to trees or to rocky shelves near coasts. Up to four eggs are incubated, and the young are fed by both parents.<\/p>\n<p>The cormorant frequents swamps around the Sea of Galilee, Lake Huleh (the waters of Merom), and the Mediterranean coast. Its Hebrew name originally denoted the “hurling down” of the bird at its prey. Cormorants dive into deep water and sometimes seem to zoom beneath the surface in their hunt for fish. The cormorant’s greed is proverbial. It was ceremonially unclean for the Israelites (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Pelican (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Crane\">Crane<\/p>\n<p>Tall wading birds <em>(Grus grus)<\/em> resembling storks and herons but with shorter talons. The plumage has a silvery gloss and the tail feathers are wavy. Large flocks of cranes flying in wedge-shaped formations pass over the Holy Land during the daylight hours each fall on their way to Africa from the northern countries of Europe and again in the spring when they return north to breed. Migratory flocks may number as many as 2,000 birds. Jeremiah 8:7 refers to the crane’s migratory habits.<\/p>\n<p>The usual call of the crane is best described as a bellow, but during migratory flight they emit a chattering sound that may be referred to in Isaiah 38:14. Cranes have remarkably powerful voices, their calls seeming to carry for miles. Migrating flocks usually have a flock leader who does the calling.<\/p>\n<p>A crane’s height may reach 40 to 60 inches (101.6 to 152.4 centimeters). Except for the ostrich, the crane is the tallest bird ever to inhabit the Holy Land. A crane’s wingspread may exceed 90 inches (228.6 centimeters). The overall color is steel gray; the head and neck are black with a longitudinal white stripe. The crane feeds on land rather than in shallow water. It feeds primarily on grass and grain yet may devour insects, snakes, small alligators, frogs, and worms, using its long, powerful bill as a sharp hammer for killing such creatures.<\/p>\n<p>The crane usually nests in solitary places, often in shallow water or nearby. Its nest is a mass of vegetation, holding two or three eggs that are light-colored with darker spots.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cuckoo\">Cuckoo<\/p>\n<p>Small, drab brown bird known for its parasitic habits. The term the <span>kjv<\/span> used in Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15 may refer either to the common cuckoo <em>(Cuculus canorus)<\/em> or to the great spotted cuckoo <em>(Clamator glandarius).<\/em> The bird acts as a brood parasite, laying its eggs in the nest of another species after pushing out one of the eggs of the host species. The young cuckoo hatches before the young of the host species and evicts the other young. The foster parents raise it as their own.<\/p>\n<p>The cuckoo, an insect eater, is considered ritually unclean in Scripture, which might imply that it is a predator or carrion-eater. For that reason some believe the Hebrew word actually refers to the seagull or sea mew rather than the cuckoo. Gulls, terns, and petrels are all common on the seashore and lakes of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars believe that the Hebrew word refers not to the cuckoo but to one of the owls, possibly the long-eared owl.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Seagull (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Eagle\">Eagle<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey, genus <em>Aquila.<\/em> Vultures were often confused with eagles, making identification of the biblical birds difficult. Eagles’ heads are not bald as are the heads of vultures, but from a distance they appear similar. It is possible that the Hebrew word translated “eagle” (which literally means “to tear with the beak”) may have referred to all large birds of prey, eagles and vultures alike. A number of references to the eagle in Scripture are actually references to the griffon vulture (e.g., Hos 8:1; perhaps Mt 24:28). In certain passages, however, the true eagle may be meant.<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Land has several varieties of eagle, including the imperial eagle <em>(Aquila heliaca)<\/em> and the less common golden eagle <em>(Aquila chrysaetos).<\/em> These birds are powerfully built with strong wings; their movements reveal suppleness and strength. A distinctive hooked beak, which enhances the eagle’s dignified and somewhat ferocious appearance, provides it with an effective instrument for tearing and killing prey. Short, powerful legs and prehensile claws enable an eagle to apply an almost unbreakable grip on a struggling victim. The strong talons have sharp points and edges. The eagle hunts by day.<\/p>\n<p>For Jeremiah and other prophets, the eagle was the epitome of swiftness. The golden eagle, which can fly three or four miles (5–7 kilometers) in ten minutes, may have evoked the comparisons in 2 Samuel 1:23;Jeremiah 4:13; 49:22; Lamentations 4:19 (<span>kjv<\/span>), and Habakkuk 1:8. Moses used a similar comparison to emphasize the sudden striking power of a hostile enemy (Dt 28:49). The author of Proverbs, observing the high altitude to which the eagle soars, applied that image to the human situation (Prv 23:4-5; cf. Rv 12:14).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle’s strength and invincibility were mentioned often with reference to powerful nations attacking Israel. The prophet Ezekiel described Nebuchadnezzar as an eagle (Ez 17:3). Both the Babylonians and Assyrians frequently depicted the eagle in their art, especially as a deity with a man’s body and an eagle’s head. Nebuchadnezzar even had an experience of temporary insanity in which “his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws” (Dn 4:33, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle builds its nest on inaccessible mountain peaks or at the top of the tallest trees, a fact noted by Jeremiah (Jer 49:16; cf. Jb 39:27-28; Ob 1:4). The brood consists of two or occasionally three eggs. Only the female sits on the nest, but the young eaglets are fed by both parents. Eagles are devoted to their offspring and train them with great care in the art of flying. Some commentators interpret Exodus 19:4 and Deuteronomy 32:11 as evidence of the eagle’s practice of catching its young on its wings. There is virtually no evidence from observation, however, that any eagle can perform such a feat. In some versions the wording avoids a direct statement that eagles bear their young on their wings.<\/p>\n<p>Some eagles in captivity have lived to an age of over 100 years. This remarkable longevity caused the psalmist to speak of the eagle whose youth is renewed (Ps 103:5). Confronted by its impressive qualities, biblical authors observed the eagle with awe and wonder (Jb 39:27-30; Prv 30:18-19). Those awesome qualities also contributed to several prophetic visions, including Ezekiel’s vision of a creature with an eagle’s face (Ez 1:10) and the apostle John’s vision of a holy beast like a flying eagle (Rv 4:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"FowlDomestic\">Fowl, Domestic<\/p>\n<p>Domesticated poultry <em>(Gallus gallus domesticus),<\/em> probably derived from the red jungle fowl of India. They seem to have been known already in OT times (Prv 30:31). A seal of Jaazaniah (see 2 Kgs 25:23), dating from about 600 <span>BC<\/span>, bears the image of a fighting cock. A reference to fowls or poultry for Nehemiah’s table, however, may be to wild game rather than domestic fowl (Neh 5:18).<\/p>\n<p>Poultry symbolized fertility, and the Jews carried a cock and hen in front of bridal couples at weddings. The motherly concern of hens gathering their broods was familiar to Jesus’ hearers (Mt 23:37; Lk 13:34).<\/p>\n<p>Since roosters habitually crow an hour or two before dawn, the third watch of the night, from midnight to 3:00 <span>am<\/span>, was known as the cockcrow. According to the Talmud (a commentary on Jewish law), keeping chickens was prohibited in Jerusalem in NT times to prevent the insects and larvae that breed in chicken droppings from contaminating sacrificial flesh. For that reason the cock that Peter heard (Mt 26:34, 74; Lk 22:34, 60-61) probably belonged to Romans living there or to Jews who did not follow Jewish regulations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GoatsuckerorNightHawk\">Goatsucker or Night Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Migratory bird, dark in color and short-legged, similar to the American whippoorwill. The goatsucker (genus <em>Caprimulgus<\/em>) resembles an owl with a flat head, large eyes, soft plumage, and a noiseless flight. It hunts insects at night, catches them on the wing, and during the day rests on branches. Goatsuckers were so named because they were thought by the ancients to milk goats. According to Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15, they were ritually unclean. Although some scholars believe that an owl is intended, there seems to be good reason to accept the “night hawk” translation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Goose\">Goose<\/p>\n<p>Long-necked, web-footed water birds with waterproof feathers (genus <em>Anser<\/em>). Domestic geese were known to the Greeks of Homer’s day, since they are mentioned in the <em>Odyssey.<\/em> They were domesticated in Egypt perhaps as early as the Old Kingdom (c. 2500 <span>BC<\/span>) and certainly by the time of the New Kingdom (c. 1500– 1100 <span>BC<\/span>). They were used for food and sacrifice. The breeding of geese was widespread in Canaan in biblical times; ivory carvings of the 13th or 12th century <span>BC<\/span> showing geese have been found in excavations at Megiddo in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Many species of geese spend most of their lives on land even though they are waterfowl; some even build their nests in trees. Wild geese tend to inhabit flatlands and prairies rather than mountainous terrain.<\/p>\n<p>Geese may have graced the table of King Solomon. In 1 Kings 4:23 they are referred to as “fatted fowl,” a term that may also refer to ducks, swans, guineas, pigeons, or other domestic edible birds.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hawk\">Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Small birds of prey found in the Holy Land. Most references are probably to the sparrow hawk <em>(Accipter nisus).<\/em> This bird is slightly larger than the kestrel, has a grayish-brown back and a white belly with black and brown bars. It has short feathers, long, curved talons, and broad wings, rounded at the outer ends, which enable it to soar on updrafts. The long tail, acting as a rudder, helps the bird change its course swiftly in flight. It is hence very maneuverable in the air when chasing warblers or other small birds. It does not seize its prey on the ground, as does the kestrel, but hunts and attacks small birds in flight. Hawks hunt in the daytime, unlike owls that are adapted for nighttime hunting. With their eyes located on the side of the head, hawks are very keen-sighted. They usually nest in tall trees and their nests are often occupied by the same pair year after year.<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians embalmed sparrow hawks and regarded all hawks highly. The god Horus was depicted with the head of a hawk hawk was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). It was not a permanent resident of Israel but stopped off as it migrated from north to south. Its southward migration is mentioned in Job 39:26. A reference in Isaiah 34:11 to “hawk” (“cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>) is uncertain. <em>See<\/em> Kestrel or Falcon; Kite (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Heron\">Heron<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (genus <em>Ardea<\/em>) with a long, thin neck and long legs. It has a characteristic comblike growth on the inner side of the third toe.<\/p>\n<p>Herons are generally white, blue, green, or gray. They nest together in rookeries, and both parents bring in food for the young. Herons feed on fish, small reptiles, and insects, gulping them down in one swallow. Adults and young migrate in the late fall to warm southern climates. The white heron attains a length of more than 3 feet (.9 meter), whereas the dwarf heron is only about 22 inches (55.9 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>At least seven varieties of heron are reported in the Holy Land. The white ibis, or buff-backed heron (<em>Buphus russatus<\/em>), was probably the most common species. The purple heron <em>(Ardea purpureus)<\/em> is a summer breeder found in all parts of the Holy Land where there is standing water.<\/p>\n<p>The blue-gray heron (<em>Ardea cinerea<\/em>) winters in southern Europe and North Africa, migrating to northern Europe in the early spring. In Israel it builds its winter nest near water, in swamps and along riverbanks, where it feeds on fish and frogs. It will stand patiently in the water for hours, and then suddenly its long, pointed beak darts down with lightning speed to catch its prey. Often the blue-gray heron builds its nest in a tall tree to which it may return year after year.<\/p>\n<p>According to Leviticus 11:19 and Deuteronomy 14:18, the heron was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites. Some scholars believe those references are to the cormorant, but most scholars think they refer to one of the herons.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cormorant (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hoopoe\">Hoopoe<\/p>\n<p>One of the Holy Land’s most beautiful birds (<em>Upupa epops<\/em>). It has vividly colored plumage, a lovely crown-shaped crest that becomes erect when the bird is alarmed, and a long, slender curved bill. The pinkish-brown hoopoe is about 11 inches (27.9 centimeters) long, with black and white bands on its back, tail, and wings. Hoopoes are basically desert-dwelling birds.<\/p>\n<p>The name “hoopoe” is derived from the sound of the bird’s call. To emit the sound, the neck feathers are puffed up and the head snapped in the air. When on the ground, the bird hammers its beak into the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The hoopoe arrives in the Holy Land in February, breeds in the summer, and leaves in September. It was held in religious reverence by the Egyptians. It was listed as ritually unclean (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18), probably because it searches for grubs and small insects in such unsanitary places as dunghills.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ibis\">Ibis<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (<em>Threskiornis aethiopica<\/em>) presently unknown in the Holy Land but possibly known there in biblical times. It was well known in ancient Egypt, where it was sacred to the god Thoth. Today it has practically vanished with the disappearance of swamps along the Nile.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the ibis is meant in Leviticus 11:17, where it is classified as ceremonially unclean. The same Hebrew word in Deuteronomy 14:16 and Isaiah 34:11 is translated “great owl,” a translation preferred by most scholars.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl, Great (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KestrelorFalcon\">Kestrel or Falcon<\/p>\n<p>Small hawk (<em>Falco tinnunculus<\/em>) about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long with brown, black, and yellow feathers on its breast. It was abundant in the Holy Land in villages and in the countryside, nesting on rooftops and among rocks. Like most hawks, the kestrel is able to hover and float in midair and then swoop down on its prey, seizing it with sharp, hooklike talons. It feeds largely on mice, small reptiles, and insects.<\/p>\n<p>Embalmed kestrels have been found in ancient Egyptian tombs. The Egyptians also embalmed the hunting kestrel <em>(Falco cherug),<\/em> which can be tamed and trained to hunt rabbits and other small game. Falconry (hunting with hawks of various species) was well known among the ancients and is still practiced today. That the Assyrians were familiar with falconry is seen in the records of Ashurbanipal. Because the kestrel is a predator, it was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:14). Some translations render the word as “kite” (Lv 11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>; Dt 14:13, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>), an illustration of the difficulty of identifying biblical birds precisely.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kite or Glede (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KiteorGlede\">Kite or Glede<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey <em>(Milvus milvus).<\/em> The average length of the kite is about 19 inches (48.3 centimeters). The upper part is generally dark, but the belly is white. Kites nest high in trees and build nests of vegetation, including sticks. They rarely have more than two or three young, which they feed on snakes, grasshoppers, and so on. Sometimes kites are called snake hawks.<\/p>\n<p>The kite is a migratory bird that stays in Israel during the summer, especially in the mountains of southern Judea, in the trackless wastes west of the Dead Sea, and in the wilderness of Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p>The red kite or glede is a medium-sized bird of prey. The edges of the upper part of the bill overlap with the lower one, forming sharp scissors. The tail is forked or cleft like that of a fish. Its loud cry often includes sharp whistling notes. Other Holy Land species include the black kite <em>(Milvus migrans)<\/em> and the black-winged kite <em>(Elanus caeruleus).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The kite is listed among the unclean birds in Mosaic law (Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13), but the precise identification of the birds mentioned there is disputed by some scholars and translators.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Buzzard; Kestrel or Falcon (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Lammergeier\">Lammergeier<\/p>\n<p>Largest of the vultures and less common than the other members of the family. It is grayish brown with white streaks and has a black tuft of stiff hairs in the facial area that gives it the name “bearded vulture.” Another name for it is “lamb vulture.”<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier <em>(Gypaetus barbatus)<\/em> has a unique way of killing its prey; since its beak is not particularly powerful it carries its victim high in the air and then drops it on rocks.<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier is especially partial to tortoises and to marrow bone. After jackals and smaller vultures have reduced a carcass to bone, the lammergeier crushes the bones to obtain the marrow, or swallows the pieces intact. Hence it is also known as the ossifrage, from a Latin word meaning “bone crusher.” The lammergeier was unclean in Mosaic law (Lv 11:13; Dt 14:13; both translated “vulture” in <span>nlt<\/span> and “ossifrage” in <span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ostrich\">Ostrich<\/p>\n<p>Two-toed, swift-running, flightless bird (<em>Struthio camelus<\/em>) that lives in deserts or in areas covered with stunted bushes.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times ostriches ranged as far north as Syria and were found over the entire wasteland of the Negev Desert, but they have since become extinct there. Its Hebrew name means “daughter of the desert.” It is the largest of all living birds, attaining a height of about 10 feet (3 meters) and a weight of 175 pounds (79.5 kilograms), though some males may weigh as much as 300 pounds (136.4 kilograms). The female is considerably smaller. Powerful thighs and long legs give the ostrich great speed, reported to be as high as 40 <span>mph<\/span> (64 <span>kph<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ostrich is omnivorous. It eats grass, fruits, small mammals, birds, snakes, and lizards, as well as large pebbles that assist in the breakdown of food in its gizzard. The ostrich is hunted, but its eggs are generally more sought after than the bird itself. The empty shells are traded throughout the Mediterranean area for use as utensils, or when broken up as raw material for beads. The eggs—as many as 25 in one clutch—are laid in a shallow nest of sand, with some left uncovered. They may appear to be neglected by day, but only because they are ordinarily incubated at night. The cock does most of the incubating; the female participates only during cold days. The strong, thick eggshell protects the embryo from the heat of the desert.<\/p>\n<p>Occasionally the ostrich is used for riding or even for pulling small carts. Ostrich feathers are in great demand. Ostrich plumes graced ancient royal courts as fans. An ivory-handled fan of Pharaoh Tutankhamen (King Tut) had lovely ostrich plumes. The plumes are white in the male and brownish gray in the female. The reputation of the ostrich for stupidity comes from its behavior when hunted and cornered; it fails to take evasive action even when doing so would save it. In open country, however, it is very wary and runs at great speed to escape. In contrast to the partridge, an ostrich will run away from its eggs and chicks when pursued.<\/p>\n<p>Most biblical references to ostriches emphasize their negative characteristics. They were regarded as unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). Several references associate ostriches with images of wilderness and desolation (Jb 30:29; Is 13:21; 34:13; 43:20; Jer 50:39). Their night cry, which has been compared to an ox’s lowing in pain, is referred to in Micah 1:8. Biblical writers also noted the apparent indifference of the ostrich to its brood (Jb 39:13-18; Lam 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Owl\">Owl<\/p>\n<p>Nocturnal birds (order Strigiformes) with large heads and large, forward-looking eyes. Their wing and tail feathers are soft as velvet, helping to make their flight noiseless. The owl’s body is small and slender, about the size of a pigeon, but it appears bulky because of the thick covering of feathers. Owls have been considered bearers of misfortune and omens of disaster. In the Near East, owls now live in temple ruins and pyramids in Egypt, and in rock-hewn graves, ruins, and caves on both sides of the Jordan River in Israel. They seldom come near inhabited dwellings.<\/p>\n<p>Owls have excellent night vision, which they use to capture rodents or other animals. Although unusually large, the owl’s eyes are almost useless in the daylight because the light dazzles them. The owl is able to swallow its prey whole because of its elastic esophagus. Indigestible hair and bones are regurgitated as pellets. The bill is short but sharply hooked.<\/p>\n<p>Owls may lay up to ten eggs. The young are cared for on the nest by both parents. Both adults and young tend to remain in the area in which they were hatched. Eight species of owls are found in the Holy Land, of which five are plentiful. It is difficult, however, to identify a particular species with any of the four Hebrew words translated “owl” in Scripture. A fifth word translated “owl” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is more appropriately identified with the ostrich (<span>rsv<\/span>). Owls appear in the lists of unclean birds (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:16), and although translations differ, they concur that all species of owls, being predators, are unclean.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ostrich (above); Owl, Barn or White; Owl, Great; Owl, Little; Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlBarnorWhite\">Owl, Barn or White<\/p>\n<p>Large owl <em>(Tyto alloa)<\/em> with a distinct heart-shaped face. It may get its Hebrew name from a snoring sound it makes when breathing in the nest. In flight it emits a frightening screech, and thus is sometimes referred to as the screech owl. Its somewhat sinister features—a large head and wide pop eyes—have led some people to consider it demonic, but they have also inspired another name, the monkey-faced owl. It is a useful bird, however, devouring rodents that raid fields and damage stored grain. Like other owls, it sleeps during the day and hunts at night with a well-developed sense of hearing and sight. Its color is light brownish yellow with a white mask around the eyes and cheeks. The whole leg is covered with feathers that protect it against the bites of struggling victims in its talons.<\/p>\n<p>Some modern translations mention the barn or white owl by name (Lv 11:17, <span>njb<\/span>; 11:18, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>njb<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above), Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlGreat\">Owl, Great<\/p>\n<p>Large owl, standing nearly two feet (60.9 centimeters) tall <em>(Asio otus).<\/em> The color is mouse gray with gray-brown spots and black stripes. As one of its names indicates, it has tufted “ears” and is sometimes called the great horned owl. It feeds on rodents, such as rats and mice. It winters in Israel among ruins and in groves.<\/p>\n<p>The great owl may be the owl mentioned in the Bible among the birds of desolation that will inhabit devastated Edom (Is 34:11, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). It is also mentioned by name in some translations of the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlLittle\">Owl, Little<\/p>\n<p>Smallest of all nocturnal birds of prey. Chiefly insectivorous, the little owl <em>(Athene noctua glaux)<\/em> also feeds at times on tiny birds. It is the most common owl in the Holy Land, dwelling among ruins, tombstones, rocks, and thickets (perhaps the owl of Ps 102:6). Its voice sounds like that of a dying person. On occasion it may be observed perched on a rock with its large eyes gazing off into the distance, a pose that the ancients considered a sign of wisdom. The Greeks associated the little owl with the goddess Athena. It is mentioned by name in several translations (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlScops\">Owl, Scops<\/p>\n<p>Small owl <em>(Otus scops)<\/em> distinguished by two horn-shaped crests of hairlike feathers on its head. It perches in an inclined posture and hops and dances like a goat. During the hatching period, the male’s hooting sounds like a moan. The scops owl feeds on insects, rodents, and birds. During invasions of mice or locusts, these owls have appeared in large flocks and helped to destroy the pests. They have been known to attack humans who intrude on their nests. They are well-known inhabitants of Eurasia and Africa.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars suggest that the scops is the true screech owl, because of its whistling calls that resound through the night. The screech owl is mentioned only once in Scripture (Is 34:14, <span>kjv<\/span>), but that translation is the subject of scholarly debate. Following traditional Jewish mythology, some translations use the Hebrew word <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">lilith<\/span><em>)<\/em> as a proper name. In Jewish tradition Lilith was a witch-demon who, before Eve’s creation, was Adam’s wife. She became the mother of demons and was thought to attack children during the night; thus the name “Lilith” is translated “night hag” (<span>rsv<\/span>) or “night monster” (<span>nasb<\/span>). Most scholars favoring the mythical interpretation, however, suggest that Isaiah was using a popular legend to evoke a sense of desolation and did not himself believe in the existence of Lilith. There is little support for “screech owl” as an appropriate translation of the name.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Owl, Barn or White (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Partridge\">Partridge<\/p>\n<p>Most common game bird in the Holy Land. The partridge resembles a chicken in its basic anatomy but has a less chunky body and a longer tail. Two species of partridge inhabit the Holy Land: the sand partridge <em>(Ammoperdix heyi),<\/em> found near the Dead Sea, in the Jordan River valley, and in the Sinai Desert; and the chukar partridge <em>(Alectoris graeca).<\/em> The sand partridge is a medium-sized bird with yellow feet. The male has sandy-buff plumage, upper tail feathers penciled and barred with brown, and a chestnut and white undersurface. The female is a grayish buff. The chukar partridge resembles the common French partridge of Europe, having a body about 16 inches (40.6 centimeters) long. It is covered with beautiful and radiantly colored feathers.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical reference (1 Sm 26:20; probably the sand partridge because of the geographical context) alludes to the common method of catching it by chasing. It was also hunted with snares (cf. Ps 91:3) or by hunters hiding in a blind. The fast-running partridge soon becomes exhausted, which enables hunters to run it to the ground and kill it. Nevertheless, by running and jumping, it can ascend very steep cliffs. The bird finds refuge among bushes into which its brownish-green feathers blend protectively. If it were not such a prolific breeder, it would probably have become extinct by being hunted for food.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical description of the partridge gathering a brood she did not hatch (Jer 17:11) seems to be based on the fact that the hen lays at least two clutches of eggs, one for herself and one for the cock to incubate.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Peacock\">Peacock<\/p>\n<p>Member of the quail, partridge, and pheasant family, the peacock <em>(Pavo cristatus)<\/em> is actually the male peafowl. Its mate is properly known as the peahen. The male attracts attention because of a stately, luxurious appearance enhanced by magnificent feathers. The breast is a brilliant metallic blue, and each tail feather has a brilliant eye near the tip. When lowered, the unusually long tail feathers form a train behind the peacock on the ground, giving it an overall length of up to six feet (1.8 meters). The train can also be raised to form a huge fan adorned with the multicolored eyes. During courtship the feathers are raised and vibrated to make a distinct rustling noise. The rather drab peahen lacks the long train.<\/p>\n<p>Because it is not native to the Holy Land, the peacocks referred to in 1 Kings 10:22 and 2 Chronicles 9:21 are thought by some scholars to be Old World monkeys or baboons brought from east Africa, or guinea hens from the upper Nile River region. There is evidence, however, that the Phoenicians introduced peacocks to the Egyptian pharaoh, perhaps as early as the time of King Solomon. It is possible that Solomon’s trade expeditions ranged as far as India, where the peacock is native. The peacock was also well known to the Greeks and Romans. Alexander the Great prized its beauty and forbade his soldiers to kill the bird.<\/p>\n<p>In the early Christian church the peacock became a symbol of the immortality promised in the resurrection of Christ. In addition, the eyes of its tail came to represent the all-seeing eye of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Pelican\">Pelican<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all aquatic birds, considerably larger even than the swan. The pelican <em>(Pelecanus onocrotalus)<\/em> is generally about 50 inches (127 centimeters) long with a 16-inch (40.6-centimeters) beak, the upper part of which is hooked downward at the end, facilitating fish catching. The lower part of the bill supports a yellow pouch extending down the throat. The pouch may hold up to three gallons (11.4 liters) of food (small fish) and water. The pelican’s webbed feet are peculiar in having webs between all four toes. Pelicans are expert swimmers as well as efficient fliers. The pelican’s massive body, long neck, and comparatively small head give it proportions that make rising from the water difficult. To take off, a pelican must first flap awkwardly along the surface, pounding at the water with its legs.<\/p>\n<p>Pelicans fly and nest in groups. Both sexes care for the young that hatch from the one to four eggs. Whereas most birds feed their young by placing food into their mouths, the pelican reverses the process; the young pelican sticks its head and most of its body into its mother’s throat and plucks partially digested food from the mother’s crop. The deep penetration of the young’s beak into the mother’s gullet led ancients to believe that the young were feeding on the blood of the mother’s breast, thus giving rise to wide usage of the pelican as a symbol of Christ’s atonement, and of charity in general.<\/p>\n<p>The roseate pelican is white, at times with a faint rose tinge, and has black feathers growing from the wing joint farthest from the body. The legs, pouch, and skin around the eyes are yellow; the hook of the beak is red. This species may grow up to six feet (1.8 meters) long with a wingspread of up to eight feet (2.4 meters). During the breeding season, the coloration of the exposed areas of the roseate pelican’s legs and face changes from gray to bright orange or red. At the same time the white feathers acquire a beautiful pink tint originating from an oil-gland secretion. The oil is spread throughout the plumage by the bird as it preens.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars question whether “pelican” is an appropriate translation of the Hebrew in several verses, believing rather that the word refers to one of the owls, hawks, or vultures. Most translations include the pelican in the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17). Opinion on the other references is more sharply divided. Some scholars maintain that the desert context of the verses eliminates the possibility of a water bird like the pelican (cf. Ps 102:6, “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Is 34:11, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “hawk,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Zep 2:14, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>). On the other hand, the roseate pelican frequents the rivers, lakes, and marshes of the Holy Land. After flying out to sea as far as 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to swoop down on fish near the surface, the pelican often returns inland to a deserted place to digest its enormous meal. Thus, the pelican may be the lonely wilderness bird of those passages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PigeonorDove\">Pigeon or Dove<\/p>\n<p>Species of the pigeon family (Columbidae). In common usage the names “pigeon” and “dove” are virtually interchangeable. The common domestic pigeon familiar to city dwellers the world over, for example, is actually a descendant of the wild rock dove. Both names are used in English translations of the Bible to translate the same Hebrew word. A second Hebrew word is usually translated “turtledove.” Nevertheless, it seems clear that the ancient Hebrews recognized differences among dove species.<\/p>\n<p>At least six species of pigeon or dove reside in modern Israel: the rock, ring, and stock doves (genus <em>Columba<\/em>), and the turtle, collared, and palm doves (genus <em>Streptopelia<\/em>). Of the six, the rock dove <em>(Columba livia)<\/em> and the turtledove <em>(Streptopelia turtur)<\/em> seem to be the two most often referred to in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Pigeons vary in size from 6 to over 12 inches (15 to 30 centimeters). The most colorful Israeli species is the rock dove, which can be a beautiful silvery gray with grayish-green iridescent plumage on the wings (noted by David, Ps 68:13). The smaller doves <em>(Streptopelia)<\/em> are less colorful, mostly gray or buff with a blackish or checkered half collar on the back of the neck. Pigeons have short necks and small heads, plump bodies, and short wings controlled by strong muscles that enable them to fly considerable distances. The smaller doves have longer tails.<\/p>\n<p>At present, the wild rock dove is found primarily in the area around the Sea of Galilee and farther to the south in the many ravines leading down to the Dead Sea. Wild rock doves prefer to build their nests on rocks and cliff faces, a fact precisely described in Scripture (Sg 2:14; Jer 48:28). All Israeli doves build fragile nests of scraps of vegetation. Eggs are hatched twice a year. Doves seldom lay more than two eggs. The young are cared for in the nest by both parents, who rove over the fields eating seeds and weeds. The adult’s crop contains digested food in a milky condition, called pigeon’s milk, which can be regurgitated and fed to the young.<\/p>\n<p>During courtship there is a great deal of rivalry among the male doves. The turtledove’s courtship dance is an awesome aerial display. The attention to courtship, the joint care of young, and the solicitude of the parents for each other, noted from earliest times, have made the dove one of the most popular symbols of love and peace (Sg 1:15; 2:14; 4:1; 5:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major distinction between pigeons (ring doves) and turtledoves seems to have been recognized by ancient writers. Pigeons are year-round residents and easily tamed, whereas turtledoves are migratory. Turtledoves were confined in cages singly or in pairs as pets or for sacrifices. Pigeons were probably the first birds to be domesticated, perhaps as early as Noah’s time (Gn 8:8-12). They were depicted on the earliest Egyptian monuments, and their edibility was mentioned in early Egyptian texts. Before long, domestic pigeons were regarded as evidence of a household’s prosperity. In the more prosperous households they nested in dovecotes of molded pottery clay fashioned in latticelike structures (hence the “windows” of Is 60:8).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times there were many dovecotes in the parks around Herod the Great’s palace in Jerusalem. The dove’s popularity was due not only to its docility but also to its desirability as food and as an acceptable and relatively inexpensive sacrifice. The turtledove may have been regarded more highly as a sacrifice because of its wildness and consequent lesser availability. The two biblical references to turtledoves not in a sacrificial context refer to their migratory habits and to their arrival in Israel in the spring (Sg 2:12; Jer 8:7; cf. Hos 11:11).<\/p>\n<p>Most of the references to doves and pigeons in the Bible are in statements about sacrificial procedures (Gn 15:7-10; Lv 1:14; 5:7; 12:6; Nm 6:10; Lk 2:24). Other references, however, include a range of observations and symbolic usages of the dove. Its throaty moaning was often observed (Is 38:14; 59:11; Ez 7:16; Na 2:7). Its power of flight was well known (Ps 55:6), as were its beauty (Sg 1:15; 4:1; 5:12), its gentleness and loyalty to its mate (Sg 2:14; 5:2; 6:9), its affection (Ps 74:19), and its innocence (Mt 10:16). The one negative reference to doves is in Hosea 7:11, where they are said to be senseless and foolish, perhaps in reference to their overly trusting nature.<\/p>\n<p>Of NT references, perhaps the most significant is the description of the Holy Spirit at Christ’s baptism as a descending dove (Mt 3:16). The dove’s loving nature made it natural for early Christians to connect the dove image with the concept of the Comforter. Since then the dove has remained the most popular symbol of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Quail\">Quail<\/p>\n<p>Short, stocky birds with bills and feet similar to those of chickens; hence they are adapted to eating seeds or insects. Quail <em>(Coturnix coturnix)<\/em> are the smallest of the subfamily of poultry that also includes pheasants and partridges. Quail (or “quails,” another plural form) are about ten inches (25.4 centimeters) long and have small, rounded wings. They burst from their hiding places in the grass or bushes with a whirring sound. The belly of the quail is white. Up to 18 eggs are laid, and if the mother dies, the male has been known to assume the care of the young. Quail of the Mediterranean region winter in the Sudan and migrate northward in vast flocks in the spring. Quail cannot maintain a long sustained flight but make use of wind currents to keep them aloft.<\/p>\n<p>Enormous flocks of quail twice served as food for the Israelites in the wilderness of Sinai, when the birds were driven down in the desert miraculously by winds (Ex 16:13; Nm 11:31-32; Ps 105:40). The second time they were probably flying along the Gulf of Aqaba and were blown off course by the east wind (Nm 11:31; Ps 78:26-28). Their inability to sustain long flight may account for their low flying level—two cubits, or about 40 inches (101.6 centimeters). When exhausted, they were easily caught by hand (Nm 11:31-32). Quail were considered clean and the most delicate eating of all game birds, and they were preserved by drying in the sun.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Raven\">Raven<\/p>\n<p>Member of the crow family (Corvidae). The Hebrew word for “raven” means “black one.” The raven (<em>Corvus corax<\/em>) weighs about three pounds (1.36 kilograms) and varies from 22 to 26 inches (56 to 66 centimeters) in length. Its tail is broader in the middle than at either end. Eight species are found in Israel: three ravens, two jackdaws, one crow, one rook, and one chough. The crow, about 20 inches (50.8 centimeters) long, is smaller than a raven, and its tail is uniform in width. The raven’s most conspicuous feature is its glossy black iridescent plumage.<\/p>\n<p>Ravens and crows have survived in spite of the dislike many humans have for them. Excellent fliers, they migrate by day and congregate in great flocks of up to several hundred thousand. During the nesting season, they make nests of sticks in which two to seven eggs are laid. Ravens mate for life. Equipped with strong wings, a strong bill, and strong feet, ravens can live in isolated places from which they range widely for food. That it did not return to the ark was a good sign to Noah, indicating that the raven could find food and possibly a place to rest on dry mountaintops (Gn 8:7).<\/p>\n<p>The raven, essentially a scavenger, was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:15; Dt 14:14). Yet ravens fed Elijah at God’s command (1 Kgs 17:4-6). Job was told that God gave the raven its food (Jb 38:41), as the psalmist and Jesus repeated (Ps 147:9; Lk 12:24). The raven’s glistening black plumage inspired the bride’s comparison of her beloved’s hair (Sg 5:11). They prefer desolate, uninhabited areas as their home territory (Is 34:11). Ravens are crafty, active birds. Some are capable of speaking, solving puzzles, and performing feats of memory. Bold and curious, they sometimes use their talents for theft.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Seagull\">Seagull<\/p>\n<p>Robust seabirds, primarily scavengers (family Laridae). Several species of gulls live along the seacoast of the Holy Land. They are usually gray-backed with white heads and underparts and black wing tips. The slender bill ends in a downward curve.<\/p>\n<p>Seagulls may be 8 to 30 inches (20 to 76 centimeters) long. Many species migrate, traveling long distances with their superb flying ability. Gulls can also swim easily because of their webbed feet. Their voice is like a harsh scream or squawk. In nesting season many nest together in any available place, such as a cliff or tree. Both male and female incubate and care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>Because gulls will eat almost anything, they are listed as ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15, <span>asv<\/span> has “sea mew,” a common European gull). Some commentators believe that those passages refer to an owl or to the cuckoo and not to the seagull.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cuckoo (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Sparrow\">Sparrow<\/p>\n<p>Small bird of the finch family (Fringillidae) or the weaver finch family (Ploceidae), considered to be of little worth. The Hebrew word is a general term for “bird” and refers to any small bird such as a sparrow, finch, thrush, or starling. In translation, however, the word sometimes refers to the common English or house sparrow (<em>Passer domestica;<\/em> Ps 84:3; Prv 26:2).<\/p>\n<p>Dull in color with a black throat, the male house sparrow is a noisy and energetic creature. The nest, when built in open places, has an opening on the side and is made of almost anything available. Sparrows also nest in sheltered places, in dwellings, boxes, or holes in trees. They lay four to seven eggs.<\/p>\n<p>The common or house sparrow was known in ancient Greece and Egypt. There it had a reputation for invading fields in large swarms and picking the seeds from them. It is a permanent resident of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The sparrow is prolific and lives in close association with humans. It was considered ritually clean. Sparrows brought low prices in countries where they were sold (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6). Today in Near Eastern marketplaces, boys offer live sparrows for sale. Tied together in groups of four to six by strings attached to one leg, the birds fly about over the boys’ heads. Evidently such a sight was common in NT times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Stork\">Stork<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged, white wading bird (genus <em>Ciconia<\/em>) having large, powerful wings with glossy black primary and secondary feathers. The flapping of its wings produces a loud rushing sound. Connecting membranes between the toes prevent the bird from sinking into the mud. Its red bill is sharp and long, serving to seize and lift its prey out of the water. Storks are mute, lacking a voice box.<\/p>\n<p>Flocks of storks pass through the Holy Land during their September migration on the way to central and southern Africa and likewise in the spring on their return flight to their homes in northern Israel, Syria, and Europe. Storks travel in vast flocks during the day, spreading out against the sky.<\/p>\n<p>The stork’s faithful tending of the young is proverbial, as is its habit of returning annually to the same nesting place. Storks have the habit of adding to their nests each year, and it is possible to find nests that are 100 years old and have a height of more than three feet (.9 meter).<\/p>\n<p>Two species of storks frequent the Holy Land. The white stork <em>(Ciconia alba)<\/em> is 40 inches (101.6 centimeters) tall, and its wingspread is six feet (1.8 meters), enabling it to move with a slow, sustained flight or to soar. In folklore the white stork is sometimes considered to be a harbinger of good fortune.<\/p>\n<p>The black stork <em>(Ciconia nigra),<\/em> common around the Dead Sea valley, nests in trees; hence it may be the tree-dwelling species referred to in Psalm 104:17. The Hebrew name for “stork” means literally the “kingly one,” or the “loyal one,” a reference to the care of the bird for its young. Like the heron, the stork was ceremonially unclean because of its diet of aquatic organisms, refuse, small animals, birds, and reptiles (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Jeremiah mentioned the stork’s uncanny and instinctive knowledge of the time of its migration (Jer 8:7). Its impressive wings figured in one of Zechariah’s visions (Zec 5:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swallow\">Swallow<\/p>\n<p>Small, nearly black, forked-tailed bird with long, tapering wings, noted for its graceful flight <em>(hirundo rustica).<\/em> The small, weak feet are poorly adapted for walking. Swallows resemble swifts in shape and life habits but are somewhat smaller.<\/p>\n<p>The swallow’s large mouth enables it to catch insects while in flight. Colors vary from brown and blue to white. Swallows often nest in buildings, a feature noticed by the psalmist, who reported a swallow’s home at the temple (Ps 84:3).<\/p>\n<p>Swallows are basically resident in Israel, whereas the swift is a migratory bird noted for the regularity of its migratory schedule. The “swallow” of Isaiah 38:14 probably refers to a swift, as does Jeremiah 8:7, where the dependability of the bird is contrasted with the irregularity of God’s people. Proverbs 26:2 may be a reference to either the swallow or the swift.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swift (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swan\">Swan<\/p>\n<p>Large, graceful water birds. Two species of swan (genus <em>Cygnus<\/em>) are found in the Middle East as passing migrants <em>(Cygnus olor<\/em> and <em>Cygnus musicus).<\/em> Swans are known as the best musicians among the birds and were considered sacred to the god Apollo by the Greeks. Their voices sound like flutes and harps.<\/p>\n<p>The references in Leviticus 11:18 and Deuteronomy 14:16 (<span>kjv<\/span>) are probably not to the swan but to the water hen or the barn owl, since there seems little reason to declare the vegetarian swan an unclean animal. <em>See also<\/em> Owl, Barn or White (above); Water Hen (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swift\">Swift<\/p>\n<p>Small, strong flyers (genus <em>Apus<\/em>). Like the swallow, the swift has long, bent wings and a cleft tail, enabling it to obtain great speed as it skims the ground and sweeps through the air. A swift devours a great many harmful insects, catching them in its mouth in flight. Many swifts make their nests in rooftops and in nooks and crannies of city walls. Their nests are built with strong feathers cemented together with saliva. Other swifts live in caves and clefts of rocks.<\/p>\n<p>Common swifts are native to Israel, and in the Jordan Valley they occur in large flocks. Isaiah 38:14 (<span>niv<\/span>) seems to be clear reference to the swift’s plaintive call, since the swallow’s sharp chirp is not a striking simile for a distraught king’s cry. The swift has a soft, delicate voice, and its cry could be easily interpreted as melodious wailing.<\/p>\n<p>The migratory swifts arrive on a precise schedule in the Holy Land in late winter, and immense flocks fill the cities with their cries. Thus the reference in Jeremiah 8:7 to swallows, which are largely permanent residents, is probably to swifts.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swallow (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Vulture\">Vulture<\/p>\n<p>Subfamily (Aegypiinae) of the hawk family (Accipitridae). Each of the four species of Old World vultures is found in the Holy Land: the Egyptian, griffon, black, and bearded vulture (the bearded vulture is also known as the lammergeier). These birds range in size from the 24-inch (61-centimeters) Egyptian vulture to the huge bearded vulture, largest of all flying birds in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Most vultures are brown or black, having a short neck and a short, hooked bill with which they tear the dead animal flesh of which they are fond. All vultures, except the bearded, have bare or down-covered heads and necks, enabling these scavengers to penetrate deep into a carcass without spoiling the plumage. Excellent eyesight enables a vulture to locate a carcass from a lofty soaring position. Considering the decayed condition of most of its food, a vulture’s poor sense of smell may be a fortunate limitation. Vultures nest in any convenient place; both parents care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word usually translated “eagle” in the OT may have been a general term for all large birds of prey, including vultures. Thus many of the passages about eagles may refer to either the eagle or the vulture (cf. Lv 11:13; Dt 14:12, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). Such passages include references to nesting habits (Jb 39:27-28; Jer 49:16; Ob 1:4), care for fledglings (Dt 32:11), powers of flight (Ex 19:4; Dt 28:49; Jb 9:26; Lam 4:19), and extremely high soaring altitude (Prv 23:5; 30:19; Is 40:31). Despite variations among translations, the vulture clearly belongs in the list of unclean birds because of its foul diet (Lv 11:13, 18; Dt 14:12, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Several references to the eagle in the <span>kjv<\/span> have been changed to “vulture” in modern translations. The change seems appropriate in the references to the vulture as a sign of present or impending doom (Lam 4:19; Hos 8:1). Likewise the eye-plucking bird of Proverbs 30:17 is probably a vulture. The phrase “bald as the eagle” (Mi 1:16) clearly should read “bald as the vulture,” since there are no bald eagles in Israel and most vultures are bald. Since the vulture, like the eagle, was a symbol of sovereignty and domination in the ancient Near East, some gods were represented as vultures. Thus Ezekiel’s comparison of the kings of Babylon and Egypt to eagles may be conceived alternatively as comparisons to vultures (Ez 17:3, 7). Jesus’ reference to the eagles congregating around corpses at the end times (Mt 24:28) should also be revised to vultures, since eagles are usually solitary eaters, whereas vultures generally flock together around carrion.<\/p>\n<p>Several <span>kjv<\/span> references to vultures are usually translated “kite” or “falcon” in modern translations (cf. various versions of Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13; Jb 28:7; Is 34:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Kestrel; Kite; Lammergeier; Vulture, Black, or Osprey; Vulture, Egyptian; Vulture, Griffon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureBlackorOsprey\">Vulture, Black, or Osprey<\/p>\n<p>Diurnal flesh eater, a little over three feet (.9 meter) long with a wingspread of over three yards (2.7 meters). The feathers of the black or osprey vulture (<em>Aegypius monachus<\/em>) are black and the head and upper part of the neck are bald like those of other carrion eaters. It nests in the Jordan River valley and seems to have been abundant in biblical times. Today it is quite rare. The black vulture is probably the osprey of Leviticus 11:13 and Deuteronomy 14:12.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureEgyptian\">Vulture, Egyptian<\/p>\n<p>Also known as the gier eagle or as pharaoh’s hen. The plumage of the Egyptian vulture (<em>Neophron percnopterus<\/em>) is basically white with a naked head and yellow neck. The Egyptian vulture breaks bones left by other vultures. Its flight is slow and easy, and its voice is a croak. Measuring about 24 inches (61 centimeters) in length, it is the smallest of all the carrion-eating birds found in the Holy Land. It may be referred to in the list of unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17, “gier eagle,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “carrion vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>nlt<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureGriffon\">Vulture, Griffon<\/p>\n<p>One of the largest flying birds in the Holy Land <em>(Gyps fulvus).<\/em> Until a generation ago, the griffon vulture was one of the most common birds in the Holy Land. Today it is on the verge of extinction. Many have been killed by eating poisonous bait meant for foxes and jackals. In addition, its reproduction is limited; the female lays only one or two eggs a year.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture measures about four feet (121.9 centimeters) in length and up to ten feet (3 meters) between wing tips. Its beak is extremely strong, and its short toes are fitted with blunt talons. It is a light-brown bird with a pale yellow head and neck that are almost bare, being covered only with a very fine down.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture feeds mostly on carrion, but also on locusts and small tortoises. It is able to go without food for several days with no ill effects, but when it does break its fast, it gorges itself. It is found especially in the region of the Sea of Galilee. Most biblical references to the vulture are likely to be to the griffon vulture.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"WaterHen\">Water Hen<\/p>\n<p>Small water bird of the rail family. The water hen listed among unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:16, <span>rsv<\/span> only) may be the biblical bird most difficult to identify. Several alternatives have been suggested, including the swan (<span>kjv<\/span>), one of the owls (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>), or the marsh hen (<span>tlb<\/span>). Most scholars rule out the swan, since it is a vegetarian bird and thus should not be considered unclean. An owl remains a possibility.<\/p>\n<p>The marsh hen is a rail, several species of which inhabit Israel. One of those species is the purple gallinule <em>(Porphyrio porphyrio).<\/em> Rails are very thin birds varying from 6 to 20 inches (15 to 51 centimeters) in length. They live in marshes, where they eat a great variety of animal and vegetable matter, thus making them a candidate for inclusion in the Mosaic lists of unclean animals.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Animals.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIRDS<\/h3>\n\n<p>Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult or impossible. The biblical languages were not highly specialized scientific languages. People in biblical times generally knew the difference between similar animals now categorized as separate species. For birds, however, they frequently used poetic, descriptive terms. Biblical scholars attempt to overcome the difficulties in identification by comparing the Hebrew words with similar words in related languages and by attention to the habitat, habits, and characteristics attributed to the birds in Scripture. Nevertheless, different scholars sometimes arrive at different identifications.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalReferencestoBirds\">Biblical References to Birds<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to birds both in literal and figurative senses. The biblical writers were keen observers of nature, their awareness of birds and bird life being reflected in many passages. They asserted that God knows all the birds (Ps 50:11) and cares for them (Mt 10:29). They saw God’s covenant with Noah after the flood, his promise never to destroy life again by flood, as extending even to the birds and animals (Gn 9:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law declared many birds “unclean,” mostly species that were scavengers or predators, or inhabited waste places. Centuries later the early Christians came to regard unclean species as clean by God’s decree, revealed in the apostle Peter’s vision (Acts 10:12). Other birds, like quail, sustained the Israelites in their wanderings (Ex 16:13). The Law prescribed birds as sacrifices for a firstborn child (Lk 2:24), for a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10), for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:22), and as a burnt offering and sin offering (12:8).<\/p>\n<p>Birds are easily subject to extinction, especially through human activity. God required the Israelites to practice conservation to prevent any birds from becoming extinct in the Holy Land, both for the birds’ sake and so the Israelites would have a continuous source of food. The Law allowed foraging Israelites to take eggs or the young from a bird’s nest, but they were not permitted to kill both a mother bird and her young (Dt 22:6).<\/p>\n<p>Biblical writers turned to nature frequently for illustrations of divine principles or human characteristics. Comparisons of humans to birds sometimes carry a sense of lowness, as when King Nebuchadnezzar developed claws like a bird in his madness (Dn 4:33), or when Job remarked that birds did not know the source of wisdom (Jb 28:21). In Jesus’ parable of the sower, the birds that ate the seed scattered by the wayside may represent indifference and a lack of spiritual understanding (Mt 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture also contains sympathetic images of the plight of birds. A lonely man praying was likened to a lonely bird on a housetop (Ps 102:7). If someone was unjustly hunted by his enemies, he would understand a hunted bird’s plight (Lam 3:52). Birds were said to be affected by curses on evildoers as they fled from Jerusalem or from the face of the earth (Jer 9:10; Zep 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of such misfortune visited upon birds, Scripture affirms that, like other creatures, they are cared for and delighted in by God (Ps 50:11; Mt 6:26; 10:29). Both Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar were compared to a tree that gives shelter to the birds (Ez 31:6; Dn 4:12; cf. 2:38). Human power, however, fails eventually as when the tree representing Nebuchadnezzar was cut down, forcing the birds to flee (Dn 4:14). God’s protection, by contrast, is unfailing. Jesus likened the kingdom of God to a mustard seed, growing to become a shelter for birds (Mt 13:32). God provides a habitation for birds (Ps 104:12), although Jesus, the Son of Man, had nowhere to rest his head (Mt 8:20).<\/p>\n<p>Birds were considered evidence of God’s handiwork (Jb 12:7). Bird lore provided examples of good sense in learning from a mistake (Prv 1:17; 6:5) and of bad judgment in failing to avoid the snares of immorality (7:23). Birds and other creatures could be tamed, unlike the wicked human tongue (Jas 3:7). Birds flying without alighting were an image of an undeserved curse (Prv 26:2). Without trust in God, people might be forced by evil to flee like a bird to the mountains (Ps 11:1). Birdsong was said to bring joy (Sg 2:12). The return of God’s people to the Promised Land would be like birds returning (Hos 11:11). Jesus expressed his love for Jerusalem by saying that he longed to gather his people to himself as a hen gathers her brood under her wing (Mt 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, birds were occasionally regarded as ominous signs. For example, Pharaoh’s baker learned of impending death because in a dream birds ate the food from a basket on his head (Gn 40:17). Solomon warned against cursing the king, even in private, because “a little bird may tell them what you said” (Eccl 10:20). A vivid biblical image is that of scavenging, carrion-eating birds consuming the bodies of evildoers. To the Israelites, such a desecration of humanity was an image of ultimate horror (Dt 28:26; 1 Sm 17:44; Is 46:11; Jer 7:33; 12:9; Ez 29:5; 39:4; Rv 19:17, 21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IndividualSpecies\">Individual Species<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Bittern\">Bittern<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged wading bird <em>(Botaurus stellaris)<\/em> similar to the heron, but with shorter legs and a smaller, more compact body. Bitterns inhabit marshes, where it is easy for them to hide with their natural camouflage. A bittern’s mottled plumage of barred brown and black so duplicates the color and shape of swamp vegetation that at times the bird seems to disappear before the observer’s eyes. The neck is covered with long, soft feathers, making it appear disproportionately heavy. Bitterns are wary and solitary. During mating season the bittern’s larynx is modified to produce a mysterious-sounding cry. The body twists in an unusual manner in harmony with the notes. Bitterns nest alone in grassy marshes. Because they are shy, they have become symbols of places of desolation and loneliness.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the bittern is actually mentioned in the Bible. The <span>kjv<\/span> has “bittern” in three places (Is 14:23; 34:11; Zep 2:14). Many biblical scholars believe the Hebrew word in those verses refers not to the bittern but to the hedgehog (Is 14:23; Zep 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>) or porcupine (Is 34:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). The Hebrew word is similar to an Arabic word meaning “porcupine.” Other scholars point out that the references suggest a bird rather than a mammal, especially Zephaniah 2:14, which speaks of the creature making its “lodge in her capitals” (i.e., above Nineveh’s doorposts). Bitterns are particularly abundant in the swamps of the Tigris River (near Nineveh). The bittern’s characteristics may fit the references in the three passages better than do the hedgehog’s.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hedgehog; Animals (Porcupine).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Buzzard\">Buzzard<\/p>\n<p>Hawklike soaring bird <em>(Buteo vulgaris<\/em> or <em>Buteo ferox).<\/em> It resembles the kite, though its tail is straight and not cleft. It is mentioned in the list of unclean birds (Dt 14:13). But other translations render the word as “glede” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “kite” (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). The parallel list in Leviticus 11, however, substitutes “kite” (<span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>) or “vulture” (<span>kjv<\/span>) for “buzzard.” Thus, it is difficult to determine whether the buzzard is actually mentioned in the Bible, even though it is a common resident of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Like other great soaring birds, the buzzard is noted for its sharp eyesight, and may be the bird mentioned for that quality in Job 28:7 (variously translated “falcon,” “eagle,” or “vulture”). It will trail its prey for hours, and has a remarkable ability to see a carcass on which it descends to feed. Somewhat larger than the common buzzard is the long-legged buzzard, found in Israel, western Asia, and Syria.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kestrel; Kite; Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cormorant\">Cormorant<\/p>\n<p>Large, black gooselike bird <em>(Phalacrocorax carbo),<\/em> repeatedly depicted in art from Egypt and the Holy Land. Its length varies from 19 to 40 inches (48.3 to 101.6 centimeters). Its feet have webs between all four toes. The feet, attached far back on the body, serve as propellers when the cormorant dives to catch its meal of fish, crustacea, or amphibia. The long bill is curved at the tip, and under the bill is a sac in which the cormorant keeps the captured fish.<\/p>\n<p>Cormorants live in large companies, making nests of sticks and other vegetation that they carry to trees or to rocky shelves near coasts. Up to four eggs are incubated, and the young are fed by both parents.<\/p>\n<p>The cormorant frequents swamps around the Sea of Galilee, Lake Huleh (the waters of Merom), and the Mediterranean coast. Its Hebrew name originally denoted the “hurling down” of the bird at its prey. Cormorants dive into deep water and sometimes seem to zoom beneath the surface in their hunt for fish. The cormorant’s greed is proverbial. It was ceremonially unclean for the Israelites (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Pelican (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Crane\">Crane<\/p>\n<p>Tall wading birds <em>(Grus grus)<\/em> resembling storks and herons but with shorter talons. The plumage has a silvery gloss and the tail feathers are wavy. Large flocks of cranes flying in wedge-shaped formations pass over the Holy Land during the daylight hours each fall on their way to Africa from the northern countries of Europe and again in the spring when they return north to breed. Migratory flocks may number as many as 2,000 birds. Jeremiah 8:7 refers to the crane’s migratory habits.<\/p>\n<p>The usual call of the crane is best described as a bellow, but during migratory flight they emit a chattering sound that may be referred to in Isaiah 38:14. Cranes have remarkably powerful voices, their calls seeming to carry for miles. Migrating flocks usually have a flock leader who does the calling.<\/p>\n<p>A crane’s height may reach 40 to 60 inches (101.6 to 152.4 centimeters). Except for the ostrich, the crane is the tallest bird ever to inhabit the Holy Land. A crane’s wingspread may exceed 90 inches (228.6 centimeters). The overall color is steel gray; the head and neck are black with a longitudinal white stripe. The crane feeds on land rather than in shallow water. It feeds primarily on grass and grain yet may devour insects, snakes, small alligators, frogs, and worms, using its long, powerful bill as a sharp hammer for killing such creatures.<\/p>\n<p>The crane usually nests in solitary places, often in shallow water or nearby. Its nest is a mass of vegetation, holding two or three eggs that are light-colored with darker spots.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cuckoo\">Cuckoo<\/p>\n<p>Small, drab brown bird known for its parasitic habits. The term the <span>kjv<\/span> used in Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15 may refer either to the common cuckoo <em>(Cuculus canorus)<\/em> or to the great spotted cuckoo <em>(Clamator glandarius).<\/em> The bird acts as a brood parasite, laying its eggs in the nest of another species after pushing out one of the eggs of the host species. The young cuckoo hatches before the young of the host species and evicts the other young. The foster parents raise it as their own.<\/p>\n<p>The cuckoo, an insect eater, is considered ritually unclean in Scripture, which might imply that it is a predator or carrion-eater. For that reason some believe the Hebrew word actually refers to the seagull or sea mew rather than the cuckoo. Gulls, terns, and petrels are all common on the seashore and lakes of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars believe that the Hebrew word refers not to the cuckoo but to one of the owls, possibly the long-eared owl.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Seagull (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Eagle\">Eagle<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey, genus <em>Aquila.<\/em> Vultures were often confused with eagles, making identification of the biblical birds difficult. Eagles’ heads are not bald as are the heads of vultures, but from a distance they appear similar. It is possible that the Hebrew word translated “eagle” (which literally means “to tear with the beak”) may have referred to all large birds of prey, eagles and vultures alike. A number of references to the eagle in Scripture are actually references to the griffon vulture (e.g., Hos 8:1; perhaps Mt 24:28). In certain passages, however, the true eagle may be meant.<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Land has several varieties of eagle, including the imperial eagle <em>(Aquila heliaca)<\/em> and the less common golden eagle <em>(Aquila chrysaetos).<\/em> These birds are powerfully built with strong wings; their movements reveal suppleness and strength. A distinctive hooked beak, which enhances the eagle’s dignified and somewhat ferocious appearance, provides it with an effective instrument for tearing and killing prey. Short, powerful legs and prehensile claws enable an eagle to apply an almost unbreakable grip on a struggling victim. The strong talons have sharp points and edges. The eagle hunts by day.<\/p>\n<p>For Jeremiah and other prophets, the eagle was the epitome of swiftness. The golden eagle, which can fly three or four miles (5–7 kilometers) in ten minutes, may have evoked the comparisons in 2 Samuel 1:23;Jeremiah 4:13; 49:22; Lamentations 4:19 (<span>kjv<\/span>), and Habakkuk 1:8. Moses used a similar comparison to emphasize the sudden striking power of a hostile enemy (Dt 28:49). The author of Proverbs, observing the high altitude to which the eagle soars, applied that image to the human situation (Prv 23:4-5; cf. Rv 12:14).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle’s strength and invincibility were mentioned often with reference to powerful nations attacking Israel. The prophet Ezekiel described Nebuchadnezzar as an eagle (Ez 17:3). Both the Babylonians and Assyrians frequently depicted the eagle in their art, especially as a deity with a man’s body and an eagle’s head. Nebuchadnezzar even had an experience of temporary insanity in which “his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws” (Dn 4:33, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle builds its nest on inaccessible mountain peaks or at the top of the tallest trees, a fact noted by Jeremiah (Jer 49:16; cf. Jb 39:27-28; Ob 1:4). The brood consists of two or occasionally three eggs. Only the female sits on the nest, but the young eaglets are fed by both parents. Eagles are devoted to their offspring and train them with great care in the art of flying. Some commentators interpret Exodus 19:4 and Deuteronomy 32:11 as evidence of the eagle’s practice of catching its young on its wings. There is virtually no evidence from observation, however, that any eagle can perform such a feat. In some versions the wording avoids a direct statement that eagles bear their young on their wings.<\/p>\n<p>Some eagles in captivity have lived to an age of over 100 years. This remarkable longevity caused the psalmist to speak of the eagle whose youth is renewed (Ps 103:5). Confronted by its impressive qualities, biblical authors observed the eagle with awe and wonder (Jb 39:27-30; Prv 30:18-19). Those awesome qualities also contributed to several prophetic visions, including Ezekiel’s vision of a creature with an eagle’s face (Ez 1:10) and the apostle John’s vision of a holy beast like a flying eagle (Rv 4:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"FowlDomestic\">Fowl, Domestic<\/p>\n<p>Domesticated poultry <em>(Gallus gallus domesticus),<\/em> probably derived from the red jungle fowl of India. They seem to have been known already in OT times (Prv 30:31). A seal of Jaazaniah (see 2 Kgs 25:23), dating from about 600 <span>BC<\/span>, bears the image of a fighting cock. A reference to fowls or poultry for Nehemiah’s table, however, may be to wild game rather than domestic fowl (Neh 5:18).<\/p>\n<p>Poultry symbolized fertility, and the Jews carried a cock and hen in front of bridal couples at weddings. The motherly concern of hens gathering their broods was familiar to Jesus’ hearers (Mt 23:37; Lk 13:34).<\/p>\n<p>Since roosters habitually crow an hour or two before dawn, the third watch of the night, from midnight to 3:00 <span>am<\/span>, was known as the cockcrow. According to the Talmud (a commentary on Jewish law), keeping chickens was prohibited in Jerusalem in NT times to prevent the insects and larvae that breed in chicken droppings from contaminating sacrificial flesh. For that reason the cock that Peter heard (Mt 26:34, 74; Lk 22:34, 60-61) probably belonged to Romans living there or to Jews who did not follow Jewish regulations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GoatsuckerorNightHawk\">Goatsucker or Night Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Migratory bird, dark in color and short-legged, similar to the American whippoorwill. The goatsucker (genus <em>Caprimulgus<\/em>) resembles an owl with a flat head, large eyes, soft plumage, and a noiseless flight. It hunts insects at night, catches them on the wing, and during the day rests on branches. Goatsuckers were so named because they were thought by the ancients to milk goats. According to Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15, they were ritually unclean. Although some scholars believe that an owl is intended, there seems to be good reason to accept the “night hawk” translation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Goose\">Goose<\/p>\n<p>Long-necked, web-footed water birds with waterproof feathers (genus <em>Anser<\/em>). Domestic geese were known to the Greeks of Homer’s day, since they are mentioned in the <em>Odyssey.<\/em> They were domesticated in Egypt perhaps as early as the Old Kingdom (c. 2500 <span>BC<\/span>) and certainly by the time of the New Kingdom (c. 1500– 1100 <span>BC<\/span>). They were used for food and sacrifice. The breeding of geese was widespread in Canaan in biblical times; ivory carvings of the 13th or 12th century <span>BC<\/span> showing geese have been found in excavations at Megiddo in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Many species of geese spend most of their lives on land even though they are waterfowl; some even build their nests in trees. Wild geese tend to inhabit flatlands and prairies rather than mountainous terrain.<\/p>\n<p>Geese may have graced the table of King Solomon. In 1 Kings 4:23 they are referred to as “fatted fowl,” a term that may also refer to ducks, swans, guineas, pigeons, or other domestic edible birds.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hawk\">Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Small birds of prey found in the Holy Land. Most references are probably to the sparrow hawk <em>(Accipter nisus).<\/em> This bird is slightly larger than the kestrel, has a grayish-brown back and a white belly with black and brown bars. It has short feathers, long, curved talons, and broad wings, rounded at the outer ends, which enable it to soar on updrafts. The long tail, acting as a rudder, helps the bird change its course swiftly in flight. It is hence very maneuverable in the air when chasing warblers or other small birds. It does not seize its prey on the ground, as does the kestrel, but hunts and attacks small birds in flight. Hawks hunt in the daytime, unlike owls that are adapted for nighttime hunting. With their eyes located on the side of the head, hawks are very keen-sighted. They usually nest in tall trees and their nests are often occupied by the same pair year after year.<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians embalmed sparrow hawks and regarded all hawks highly. The god Horus was depicted with the head of a hawk hawk was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). It was not a permanent resident of Israel but stopped off as it migrated from north to south. Its southward migration is mentioned in Job 39:26. A reference in Isaiah 34:11 to “hawk” (“cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>) is uncertain. <em>See<\/em> Kestrel or Falcon; Kite (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Heron\">Heron<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (genus <em>Ardea<\/em>) with a long, thin neck and long legs. It has a characteristic comblike growth on the inner side of the third toe.<\/p>\n<p>Herons are generally white, blue, green, or gray. They nest together in rookeries, and both parents bring in food for the young. Herons feed on fish, small reptiles, and insects, gulping them down in one swallow. Adults and young migrate in the late fall to warm southern climates. The white heron attains a length of more than 3 feet (.9 meter), whereas the dwarf heron is only about 22 inches (55.9 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>At least seven varieties of heron are reported in the Holy Land. The white ibis, or buff-backed heron (<em>Buphus russatus<\/em>), was probably the most common species. The purple heron <em>(Ardea purpureus)<\/em> is a summer breeder found in all parts of the Holy Land where there is standing water.<\/p>\n<p>The blue-gray heron (<em>Ardea cinerea<\/em>) winters in southern Europe and North Africa, migrating to northern Europe in the early spring. In Israel it builds its winter nest near water, in swamps and along riverbanks, where it feeds on fish and frogs. It will stand patiently in the water for hours, and then suddenly its long, pointed beak darts down with lightning speed to catch its prey. Often the blue-gray heron builds its nest in a tall tree to which it may return year after year.<\/p>\n<p>According to Leviticus 11:19 and Deuteronomy 14:18, the heron was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites. Some scholars believe those references are to the cormorant, but most scholars think they refer to one of the herons.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cormorant (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hoopoe\">Hoopoe<\/p>\n<p>One of the Holy Land’s most beautiful birds (<em>Upupa epops<\/em>). It has vividly colored plumage, a lovely crown-shaped crest that becomes erect when the bird is alarmed, and a long, slender curved bill. The pinkish-brown hoopoe is about 11 inches (27.9 centimeters) long, with black and white bands on its back, tail, and wings. Hoopoes are basically desert-dwelling birds.<\/p>\n<p>The name “hoopoe” is derived from the sound of the bird’s call. To emit the sound, the neck feathers are puffed up and the head snapped in the air. When on the ground, the bird hammers its beak into the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The hoopoe arrives in the Holy Land in February, breeds in the summer, and leaves in September. It was held in religious reverence by the Egyptians. It was listed as ritually unclean (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18), probably because it searches for grubs and small insects in such unsanitary places as dunghills.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ibis\">Ibis<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (<em>Threskiornis aethiopica<\/em>) presently unknown in the Holy Land but possibly known there in biblical times. It was well known in ancient Egypt, where it was sacred to the god Thoth. Today it has practically vanished with the disappearance of swamps along the Nile.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the ibis is meant in Leviticus 11:17, where it is classified as ceremonially unclean. The same Hebrew word in Deuteronomy 14:16 and Isaiah 34:11 is translated “great owl,” a translation preferred by most scholars.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl, Great (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KestrelorFalcon\">Kestrel or Falcon<\/p>\n<p>Small hawk (<em>Falco tinnunculus<\/em>) about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long with brown, black, and yellow feathers on its breast. It was abundant in the Holy Land in villages and in the countryside, nesting on rooftops and among rocks. Like most hawks, the kestrel is able to hover and float in midair and then swoop down on its prey, seizing it with sharp, hooklike talons. It feeds largely on mice, small reptiles, and insects.<\/p>\n<p>Embalmed kestrels have been found in ancient Egyptian tombs. The Egyptians also embalmed the hunting kestrel <em>(Falco cherug),<\/em> which can be tamed and trained to hunt rabbits and other small game. Falconry (hunting with hawks of various species) was well known among the ancients and is still practiced today. That the Assyrians were familiar with falconry is seen in the records of Ashurbanipal. Because the kestrel is a predator, it was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:14). Some translations render the word as “kite” (Lv 11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>; Dt 14:13, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>), an illustration of the difficulty of identifying biblical birds precisely.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kite or Glede (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KiteorGlede\">Kite or Glede<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey <em>(Milvus milvus).<\/em> The average length of the kite is about 19 inches (48.3 centimeters). The upper part is generally dark, but the belly is white. Kites nest high in trees and build nests of vegetation, including sticks. They rarely have more than two or three young, which they feed on snakes, grasshoppers, and so on. Sometimes kites are called snake hawks.<\/p>\n<p>The kite is a migratory bird that stays in Israel during the summer, especially in the mountains of southern Judea, in the trackless wastes west of the Dead Sea, and in the wilderness of Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p>The red kite or glede is a medium-sized bird of prey. The edges of the upper part of the bill overlap with the lower one, forming sharp scissors. The tail is forked or cleft like that of a fish. Its loud cry often includes sharp whistling notes. Other Holy Land species include the black kite <em>(Milvus migrans)<\/em> and the black-winged kite <em>(Elanus caeruleus).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The kite is listed among the unclean birds in Mosaic law (Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13), but the precise identification of the birds mentioned there is disputed by some scholars and translators.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Buzzard; Kestrel or Falcon (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Lammergeier\">Lammergeier<\/p>\n<p>Largest of the vultures and less common than the other members of the family. It is grayish brown with white streaks and has a black tuft of stiff hairs in the facial area that gives it the name “bearded vulture.” Another name for it is “lamb vulture.”<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier <em>(Gypaetus barbatus)<\/em> has a unique way of killing its prey; since its beak is not particularly powerful it carries its victim high in the air and then drops it on rocks.<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier is especially partial to tortoises and to marrow bone. After jackals and smaller vultures have reduced a carcass to bone, the lammergeier crushes the bones to obtain the marrow, or swallows the pieces intact. Hence it is also known as the ossifrage, from a Latin word meaning “bone crusher.” The lammergeier was unclean in Mosaic law (Lv 11:13; Dt 14:13; both translated “vulture” in <span>nlt<\/span> and “ossifrage” in <span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ostrich\">Ostrich<\/p>\n<p>Two-toed, swift-running, flightless bird (<em>Struthio camelus<\/em>) that lives in deserts or in areas covered with stunted bushes.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times ostriches ranged as far north as Syria and were found over the entire wasteland of the Negev Desert, but they have since become extinct there. Its Hebrew name means “daughter of the desert.” It is the largest of all living birds, attaining a height of about 10 feet (3 meters) and a weight of 175 pounds (79.5 kilograms), though some males may weigh as much as 300 pounds (136.4 kilograms). The female is considerably smaller. Powerful thighs and long legs give the ostrich great speed, reported to be as high as 40 <span>mph<\/span> (64 <span>kph<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ostrich is omnivorous. It eats grass, fruits, small mammals, birds, snakes, and lizards, as well as large pebbles that assist in the breakdown of food in its gizzard. The ostrich is hunted, but its eggs are generally more sought after than the bird itself. The empty shells are traded throughout the Mediterranean area for use as utensils, or when broken up as raw material for beads. The eggs—as many as 25 in one clutch—are laid in a shallow nest of sand, with some left uncovered. They may appear to be neglected by day, but only because they are ordinarily incubated at night. The cock does most of the incubating; the female participates only during cold days. The strong, thick eggshell protects the embryo from the heat of the desert.<\/p>\n<p>Occasionally the ostrich is used for riding or even for pulling small carts. Ostrich feathers are in great demand. Ostrich plumes graced ancient royal courts as fans. An ivory-handled fan of Pharaoh Tutankhamen (King Tut) had lovely ostrich plumes. The plumes are white in the male and brownish gray in the female. The reputation of the ostrich for stupidity comes from its behavior when hunted and cornered; it fails to take evasive action even when doing so would save it. In open country, however, it is very wary and runs at great speed to escape. In contrast to the partridge, an ostrich will run away from its eggs and chicks when pursued.<\/p>\n<p>Most biblical references to ostriches emphasize their negative characteristics. They were regarded as unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). Several references associate ostriches with images of wilderness and desolation (Jb 30:29; Is 13:21; 34:13; 43:20; Jer 50:39). Their night cry, which has been compared to an ox’s lowing in pain, is referred to in Micah 1:8. Biblical writers also noted the apparent indifference of the ostrich to its brood (Jb 39:13-18; Lam 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Owl\">Owl<\/p>\n<p>Nocturnal birds (order Strigiformes) with large heads and large, forward-looking eyes. Their wing and tail feathers are soft as velvet, helping to make their flight noiseless. The owl’s body is small and slender, about the size of a pigeon, but it appears bulky because of the thick covering of feathers. Owls have been considered bearers of misfortune and omens of disaster. In the Near East, owls now live in temple ruins and pyramids in Egypt, and in rock-hewn graves, ruins, and caves on both sides of the Jordan River in Israel. They seldom come near inhabited dwellings.<\/p>\n<p>Owls have excellent night vision, which they use to capture rodents or other animals. Although unusually large, the owl’s eyes are almost useless in the daylight because the light dazzles them. The owl is able to swallow its prey whole because of its elastic esophagus. Indigestible hair and bones are regurgitated as pellets. The bill is short but sharply hooked.<\/p>\n<p>Owls may lay up to ten eggs. The young are cared for on the nest by both parents. Both adults and young tend to remain in the area in which they were hatched. Eight species of owls are found in the Holy Land, of which five are plentiful. It is difficult, however, to identify a particular species with any of the four Hebrew words translated “owl” in Scripture. A fifth word translated “owl” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is more appropriately identified with the ostrich (<span>rsv<\/span>). Owls appear in the lists of unclean birds (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:16), and although translations differ, they concur that all species of owls, being predators, are unclean.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ostrich (above); Owl, Barn or White; Owl, Great; Owl, Little; Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlBarnorWhite\">Owl, Barn or White<\/p>\n<p>Large owl <em>(Tyto alloa)<\/em> with a distinct heart-shaped face. It may get its Hebrew name from a snoring sound it makes when breathing in the nest. In flight it emits a frightening screech, and thus is sometimes referred to as the screech owl. Its somewhat sinister features—a large head and wide pop eyes—have led some people to consider it demonic, but they have also inspired another name, the monkey-faced owl. It is a useful bird, however, devouring rodents that raid fields and damage stored grain. Like other owls, it sleeps during the day and hunts at night with a well-developed sense of hearing and sight. Its color is light brownish yellow with a white mask around the eyes and cheeks. The whole leg is covered with feathers that protect it against the bites of struggling victims in its talons.<\/p>\n<p>Some modern translations mention the barn or white owl by name (Lv 11:17, <span>njb<\/span>; 11:18, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>njb<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above), Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlGreat\">Owl, Great<\/p>\n<p>Large owl, standing nearly two feet (60.9 centimeters) tall <em>(Asio otus).<\/em> The color is mouse gray with gray-brown spots and black stripes. As one of its names indicates, it has tufted “ears” and is sometimes called the great horned owl. It feeds on rodents, such as rats and mice. It winters in Israel among ruins and in groves.<\/p>\n<p>The great owl may be the owl mentioned in the Bible among the birds of desolation that will inhabit devastated Edom (Is 34:11, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). It is also mentioned by name in some translations of the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlLittle\">Owl, Little<\/p>\n<p>Smallest of all nocturnal birds of prey. Chiefly insectivorous, the little owl <em>(Athene noctua glaux)<\/em> also feeds at times on tiny birds. It is the most common owl in the Holy Land, dwelling among ruins, tombstones, rocks, and thickets (perhaps the owl of Ps 102:6). Its voice sounds like that of a dying person. On occasion it may be observed perched on a rock with its large eyes gazing off into the distance, a pose that the ancients considered a sign of wisdom. The Greeks associated the little owl with the goddess Athena. It is mentioned by name in several translations (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlScops\">Owl, Scops<\/p>\n<p>Small owl <em>(Otus scops)<\/em> distinguished by two horn-shaped crests of hairlike feathers on its head. It perches in an inclined posture and hops and dances like a goat. During the hatching period, the male’s hooting sounds like a moan. The scops owl feeds on insects, rodents, and birds. During invasions of mice or locusts, these owls have appeared in large flocks and helped to destroy the pests. They have been known to attack humans who intrude on their nests. They are well-known inhabitants of Eurasia and Africa.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars suggest that the scops is the true screech owl, because of its whistling calls that resound through the night. The screech owl is mentioned only once in Scripture (Is 34:14, <span>kjv<\/span>), but that translation is the subject of scholarly debate. Following traditional Jewish mythology, some translations use the Hebrew word <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">lilith<\/span><em>)<\/em> as a proper name. In Jewish tradition Lilith was a witch-demon who, before Eve’s creation, was Adam’s wife. She became the mother of demons and was thought to attack children during the night; thus the name “Lilith” is translated “night hag” (<span>rsv<\/span>) or “night monster” (<span>nasb<\/span>). Most scholars favoring the mythical interpretation, however, suggest that Isaiah was using a popular legend to evoke a sense of desolation and did not himself believe in the existence of Lilith. There is little support for “screech owl” as an appropriate translation of the name.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Owl, Barn or White (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Partridge\">Partridge<\/p>\n<p>Most common game bird in the Holy Land. The partridge resembles a chicken in its basic anatomy but has a less chunky body and a longer tail. Two species of partridge inhabit the Holy Land: the sand partridge <em>(Ammoperdix heyi),<\/em> found near the Dead Sea, in the Jordan River valley, and in the Sinai Desert; and the chukar partridge <em>(Alectoris graeca).<\/em> The sand partridge is a medium-sized bird with yellow feet. The male has sandy-buff plumage, upper tail feathers penciled and barred with brown, and a chestnut and white undersurface. The female is a grayish buff. The chukar partridge resembles the common French partridge of Europe, having a body about 16 inches (40.6 centimeters) long. It is covered with beautiful and radiantly colored feathers.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical reference (1 Sm 26:20; probably the sand partridge because of the geographical context) alludes to the common method of catching it by chasing. It was also hunted with snares (cf. Ps 91:3) or by hunters hiding in a blind. The fast-running partridge soon becomes exhausted, which enables hunters to run it to the ground and kill it. Nevertheless, by running and jumping, it can ascend very steep cliffs. The bird finds refuge among bushes into which its brownish-green feathers blend protectively. If it were not such a prolific breeder, it would probably have become extinct by being hunted for food.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical description of the partridge gathering a brood she did not hatch (Jer 17:11) seems to be based on the fact that the hen lays at least two clutches of eggs, one for herself and one for the cock to incubate.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Peacock\">Peacock<\/p>\n<p>Member of the quail, partridge, and pheasant family, the peacock <em>(Pavo cristatus)<\/em> is actually the male peafowl. Its mate is properly known as the peahen. The male attracts attention because of a stately, luxurious appearance enhanced by magnificent feathers. The breast is a brilliant metallic blue, and each tail feather has a brilliant eye near the tip. When lowered, the unusually long tail feathers form a train behind the peacock on the ground, giving it an overall length of up to six feet (1.8 meters). The train can also be raised to form a huge fan adorned with the multicolored eyes. During courtship the feathers are raised and vibrated to make a distinct rustling noise. The rather drab peahen lacks the long train.<\/p>\n<p>Because it is not native to the Holy Land, the peacocks referred to in 1 Kings 10:22 and 2 Chronicles 9:21 are thought by some scholars to be Old World monkeys or baboons brought from east Africa, or guinea hens from the upper Nile River region. There is evidence, however, that the Phoenicians introduced peacocks to the Egyptian pharaoh, perhaps as early as the time of King Solomon. It is possible that Solomon’s trade expeditions ranged as far as India, where the peacock is native. The peacock was also well known to the Greeks and Romans. Alexander the Great prized its beauty and forbade his soldiers to kill the bird.<\/p>\n<p>In the early Christian church the peacock became a symbol of the immortality promised in the resurrection of Christ. In addition, the eyes of its tail came to represent the all-seeing eye of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Pelican\">Pelican<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all aquatic birds, considerably larger even than the swan. The pelican <em>(Pelecanus onocrotalus)<\/em> is generally about 50 inches (127 centimeters) long with a 16-inch (40.6-centimeters) beak, the upper part of which is hooked downward at the end, facilitating fish catching. The lower part of the bill supports a yellow pouch extending down the throat. The pouch may hold up to three gallons (11.4 liters) of food (small fish) and water. The pelican’s webbed feet are peculiar in having webs between all four toes. Pelicans are expert swimmers as well as efficient fliers. The pelican’s massive body, long neck, and comparatively small head give it proportions that make rising from the water difficult. To take off, a pelican must first flap awkwardly along the surface, pounding at the water with its legs.<\/p>\n<p>Pelicans fly and nest in groups. Both sexes care for the young that hatch from the one to four eggs. Whereas most birds feed their young by placing food into their mouths, the pelican reverses the process; the young pelican sticks its head and most of its body into its mother’s throat and plucks partially digested food from the mother’s crop. The deep penetration of the young’s beak into the mother’s gullet led ancients to believe that the young were feeding on the blood of the mother’s breast, thus giving rise to wide usage of the pelican as a symbol of Christ’s atonement, and of charity in general.<\/p>\n<p>The roseate pelican is white, at times with a faint rose tinge, and has black feathers growing from the wing joint farthest from the body. The legs, pouch, and skin around the eyes are yellow; the hook of the beak is red. This species may grow up to six feet (1.8 meters) long with a wingspread of up to eight feet (2.4 meters). During the breeding season, the coloration of the exposed areas of the roseate pelican’s legs and face changes from gray to bright orange or red. At the same time the white feathers acquire a beautiful pink tint originating from an oil-gland secretion. The oil is spread throughout the plumage by the bird as it preens.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars question whether “pelican” is an appropriate translation of the Hebrew in several verses, believing rather that the word refers to one of the owls, hawks, or vultures. Most translations include the pelican in the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17). Opinion on the other references is more sharply divided. Some scholars maintain that the desert context of the verses eliminates the possibility of a water bird like the pelican (cf. Ps 102:6, “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Is 34:11, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “hawk,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Zep 2:14, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>). On the other hand, the roseate pelican frequents the rivers, lakes, and marshes of the Holy Land. After flying out to sea as far as 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to swoop down on fish near the surface, the pelican often returns inland to a deserted place to digest its enormous meal. Thus, the pelican may be the lonely wilderness bird of those passages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PigeonorDove\">Pigeon or Dove<\/p>\n<p>Species of the pigeon family (Columbidae). In common usage the names “pigeon” and “dove” are virtually interchangeable. The common domestic pigeon familiar to city dwellers the world over, for example, is actually a descendant of the wild rock dove. Both names are used in English translations of the Bible to translate the same Hebrew word. A second Hebrew word is usually translated “turtledove.” Nevertheless, it seems clear that the ancient Hebrews recognized differences among dove species.<\/p>\n<p>At least six species of pigeon or dove reside in modern Israel: the rock, ring, and stock doves (genus <em>Columba<\/em>), and the turtle, collared, and palm doves (genus <em>Streptopelia<\/em>). Of the six, the rock dove <em>(Columba livia)<\/em> and the turtledove <em>(Streptopelia turtur)<\/em> seem to be the two most often referred to in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Pigeons vary in size from 6 to over 12 inches (15 to 30 centimeters). The most colorful Israeli species is the rock dove, which can be a beautiful silvery gray with grayish-green iridescent plumage on the wings (noted by David, Ps 68:13). The smaller doves <em>(Streptopelia)<\/em> are less colorful, mostly gray or buff with a blackish or checkered half collar on the back of the neck. Pigeons have short necks and small heads, plump bodies, and short wings controlled by strong muscles that enable them to fly considerable distances. The smaller doves have longer tails.<\/p>\n<p>At present, the wild rock dove is found primarily in the area around the Sea of Galilee and farther to the south in the many ravines leading down to the Dead Sea. Wild rock doves prefer to build their nests on rocks and cliff faces, a fact precisely described in Scripture (Sg 2:14; Jer 48:28). All Israeli doves build fragile nests of scraps of vegetation. Eggs are hatched twice a year. Doves seldom lay more than two eggs. The young are cared for in the nest by both parents, who rove over the fields eating seeds and weeds. The adult’s crop contains digested food in a milky condition, called pigeon’s milk, which can be regurgitated and fed to the young.<\/p>\n<p>During courtship there is a great deal of rivalry among the male doves. The turtledove’s courtship dance is an awesome aerial display. The attention to courtship, the joint care of young, and the solicitude of the parents for each other, noted from earliest times, have made the dove one of the most popular symbols of love and peace (Sg 1:15; 2:14; 4:1; 5:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major distinction between pigeons (ring doves) and turtledoves seems to have been recognized by ancient writers. Pigeons are year-round residents and easily tamed, whereas turtledoves are migratory. Turtledoves were confined in cages singly or in pairs as pets or for sacrifices. Pigeons were probably the first birds to be domesticated, perhaps as early as Noah’s time (Gn 8:8-12). They were depicted on the earliest Egyptian monuments, and their edibility was mentioned in early Egyptian texts. Before long, domestic pigeons were regarded as evidence of a household’s prosperity. In the more prosperous households they nested in dovecotes of molded pottery clay fashioned in latticelike structures (hence the “windows” of Is 60:8).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times there were many dovecotes in the parks around Herod the Great’s palace in Jerusalem. The dove’s popularity was due not only to its docility but also to its desirability as food and as an acceptable and relatively inexpensive sacrifice. The turtledove may have been regarded more highly as a sacrifice because of its wildness and consequent lesser availability. The two biblical references to turtledoves not in a sacrificial context refer to their migratory habits and to their arrival in Israel in the spring (Sg 2:12; Jer 8:7; cf. Hos 11:11).<\/p>\n<p>Most of the references to doves and pigeons in the Bible are in statements about sacrificial procedures (Gn 15:7-10; Lv 1:14; 5:7; 12:6; Nm 6:10; Lk 2:24). Other references, however, include a range of observations and symbolic usages of the dove. Its throaty moaning was often observed (Is 38:14; 59:11; Ez 7:16; Na 2:7). Its power of flight was well known (Ps 55:6), as were its beauty (Sg 1:15; 4:1; 5:12), its gentleness and loyalty to its mate (Sg 2:14; 5:2; 6:9), its affection (Ps 74:19), and its innocence (Mt 10:16). The one negative reference to doves is in Hosea 7:11, where they are said to be senseless and foolish, perhaps in reference to their overly trusting nature.<\/p>\n<p>Of NT references, perhaps the most significant is the description of the Holy Spirit at Christ’s baptism as a descending dove (Mt 3:16). The dove’s loving nature made it natural for early Christians to connect the dove image with the concept of the Comforter. Since then the dove has remained the most popular symbol of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Quail\">Quail<\/p>\n<p>Short, stocky birds with bills and feet similar to those of chickens; hence they are adapted to eating seeds or insects. Quail <em>(Coturnix coturnix)<\/em> are the smallest of the subfamily of poultry that also includes pheasants and partridges. Quail (or “quails,” another plural form) are about ten inches (25.4 centimeters) long and have small, rounded wings. They burst from their hiding places in the grass or bushes with a whirring sound. The belly of the quail is white. Up to 18 eggs are laid, and if the mother dies, the male has been known to assume the care of the young. Quail of the Mediterranean region winter in the Sudan and migrate northward in vast flocks in the spring. Quail cannot maintain a long sustained flight but make use of wind currents to keep them aloft.<\/p>\n<p>Enormous flocks of quail twice served as food for the Israelites in the wilderness of Sinai, when the birds were driven down in the desert miraculously by winds (Ex 16:13; Nm 11:31-32; Ps 105:40). The second time they were probably flying along the Gulf of Aqaba and were blown off course by the east wind (Nm 11:31; Ps 78:26-28). Their inability to sustain long flight may account for their low flying level—two cubits, or about 40 inches (101.6 centimeters). When exhausted, they were easily caught by hand (Nm 11:31-32). Quail were considered clean and the most delicate eating of all game birds, and they were preserved by drying in the sun.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Raven\">Raven<\/p>\n<p>Member of the crow family (Corvidae). The Hebrew word for “raven” means “black one.” The raven (<em>Corvus corax<\/em>) weighs about three pounds (1.36 kilograms) and varies from 22 to 26 inches (56 to 66 centimeters) in length. Its tail is broader in the middle than at either end. Eight species are found in Israel: three ravens, two jackdaws, one crow, one rook, and one chough. The crow, about 20 inches (50.8 centimeters) long, is smaller than a raven, and its tail is uniform in width. The raven’s most conspicuous feature is its glossy black iridescent plumage.<\/p>\n<p>Ravens and crows have survived in spite of the dislike many humans have for them. Excellent fliers, they migrate by day and congregate in great flocks of up to several hundred thousand. During the nesting season, they make nests of sticks in which two to seven eggs are laid. Ravens mate for life. Equipped with strong wings, a strong bill, and strong feet, ravens can live in isolated places from which they range widely for food. That it did not return to the ark was a good sign to Noah, indicating that the raven could find food and possibly a place to rest on dry mountaintops (Gn 8:7).<\/p>\n<p>The raven, essentially a scavenger, was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:15; Dt 14:14). Yet ravens fed Elijah at God’s command (1 Kgs 17:4-6). Job was told that God gave the raven its food (Jb 38:41), as the psalmist and Jesus repeated (Ps 147:9; Lk 12:24). The raven’s glistening black plumage inspired the bride’s comparison of her beloved’s hair (Sg 5:11). They prefer desolate, uninhabited areas as their home territory (Is 34:11). Ravens are crafty, active birds. Some are capable of speaking, solving puzzles, and performing feats of memory. Bold and curious, they sometimes use their talents for theft.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Seagull\">Seagull<\/p>\n<p>Robust seabirds, primarily scavengers (family Laridae). Several species of gulls live along the seacoast of the Holy Land. They are usually gray-backed with white heads and underparts and black wing tips. The slender bill ends in a downward curve.<\/p>\n<p>Seagulls may be 8 to 30 inches (20 to 76 centimeters) long. Many species migrate, traveling long distances with their superb flying ability. Gulls can also swim easily because of their webbed feet. Their voice is like a harsh scream or squawk. In nesting season many nest together in any available place, such as a cliff or tree. Both male and female incubate and care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>Because gulls will eat almost anything, they are listed as ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15, <span>asv<\/span> has “sea mew,” a common European gull). Some commentators believe that those passages refer to an owl or to the cuckoo and not to the seagull.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cuckoo (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Sparrow\">Sparrow<\/p>\n<p>Small bird of the finch family (Fringillidae) or the weaver finch family (Ploceidae), considered to be of little worth. The Hebrew word is a general term for “bird” and refers to any small bird such as a sparrow, finch, thrush, or starling. In translation, however, the word sometimes refers to the common English or house sparrow (<em>Passer domestica;<\/em> Ps 84:3; Prv 26:2).<\/p>\n<p>Dull in color with a black throat, the male house sparrow is a noisy and energetic creature. The nest, when built in open places, has an opening on the side and is made of almost anything available. Sparrows also nest in sheltered places, in dwellings, boxes, or holes in trees. They lay four to seven eggs.<\/p>\n<p>The common or house sparrow was known in ancient Greece and Egypt. There it had a reputation for invading fields in large swarms and picking the seeds from them. It is a permanent resident of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The sparrow is prolific and lives in close association with humans. It was considered ritually clean. Sparrows brought low prices in countries where they were sold (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6). Today in Near Eastern marketplaces, boys offer live sparrows for sale. Tied together in groups of four to six by strings attached to one leg, the birds fly about over the boys’ heads. Evidently such a sight was common in NT times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Stork\">Stork<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged, white wading bird (genus <em>Ciconia<\/em>) having large, powerful wings with glossy black primary and secondary feathers. The flapping of its wings produces a loud rushing sound. Connecting membranes between the toes prevent the bird from sinking into the mud. Its red bill is sharp and long, serving to seize and lift its prey out of the water. Storks are mute, lacking a voice box.<\/p>\n<p>Flocks of storks pass through the Holy Land during their September migration on the way to central and southern Africa and likewise in the spring on their return flight to their homes in northern Israel, Syria, and Europe. Storks travel in vast flocks during the day, spreading out against the sky.<\/p>\n<p>The stork’s faithful tending of the young is proverbial, as is its habit of returning annually to the same nesting place. Storks have the habit of adding to their nests each year, and it is possible to find nests that are 100 years old and have a height of more than three feet (.9 meter).<\/p>\n<p>Two species of storks frequent the Holy Land. The white stork <em>(Ciconia alba)<\/em> is 40 inches (101.6 centimeters) tall, and its wingspread is six feet (1.8 meters), enabling it to move with a slow, sustained flight or to soar. In folklore the white stork is sometimes considered to be a harbinger of good fortune.<\/p>\n<p>The black stork <em>(Ciconia nigra),<\/em> common around the Dead Sea valley, nests in trees; hence it may be the tree-dwelling species referred to in Psalm 104:17. The Hebrew name for “stork” means literally the “kingly one,” or the “loyal one,” a reference to the care of the bird for its young. Like the heron, the stork was ceremonially unclean because of its diet of aquatic organisms, refuse, small animals, birds, and reptiles (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Jeremiah mentioned the stork’s uncanny and instinctive knowledge of the time of its migration (Jer 8:7). Its impressive wings figured in one of Zechariah’s visions (Zec 5:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swallow\">Swallow<\/p>\n<p>Small, nearly black, forked-tailed bird with long, tapering wings, noted for its graceful flight <em>(hirundo rustica).<\/em> The small, weak feet are poorly adapted for walking. Swallows resemble swifts in shape and life habits but are somewhat smaller.<\/p>\n<p>The swallow’s large mouth enables it to catch insects while in flight. Colors vary from brown and blue to white. Swallows often nest in buildings, a feature noticed by the psalmist, who reported a swallow’s home at the temple (Ps 84:3).<\/p>\n<p>Swallows are basically resident in Israel, whereas the swift is a migratory bird noted for the regularity of its migratory schedule. The “swallow” of Isaiah 38:14 probably refers to a swift, as does Jeremiah 8:7, where the dependability of the bird is contrasted with the irregularity of God’s people. Proverbs 26:2 may be a reference to either the swallow or the swift.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swift (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swan\">Swan<\/p>\n<p>Large, graceful water birds. Two species of swan (genus <em>Cygnus<\/em>) are found in the Middle East as passing migrants <em>(Cygnus olor<\/em> and <em>Cygnus musicus).<\/em> Swans are known as the best musicians among the birds and were considered sacred to the god Apollo by the Greeks. Their voices sound like flutes and harps.<\/p>\n<p>The references in Leviticus 11:18 and Deuteronomy 14:16 (<span>kjv<\/span>) are probably not to the swan but to the water hen or the barn owl, since there seems little reason to declare the vegetarian swan an unclean animal. <em>See also<\/em> Owl, Barn or White (above); Water Hen (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swift\">Swift<\/p>\n<p>Small, strong flyers (genus <em>Apus<\/em>). Like the swallow, the swift has long, bent wings and a cleft tail, enabling it to obtain great speed as it skims the ground and sweeps through the air. A swift devours a great many harmful insects, catching them in its mouth in flight. Many swifts make their nests in rooftops and in nooks and crannies of city walls. Their nests are built with strong feathers cemented together with saliva. Other swifts live in caves and clefts of rocks.<\/p>\n<p>Common swifts are native to Israel, and in the Jordan Valley they occur in large flocks. Isaiah 38:14 (<span>niv<\/span>) seems to be clear reference to the swift’s plaintive call, since the swallow’s sharp chirp is not a striking simile for a distraught king’s cry. The swift has a soft, delicate voice, and its cry could be easily interpreted as melodious wailing.<\/p>\n<p>The migratory swifts arrive on a precise schedule in the Holy Land in late winter, and immense flocks fill the cities with their cries. Thus the reference in Jeremiah 8:7 to swallows, which are largely permanent residents, is probably to swifts.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swallow (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Vulture\">Vulture<\/p>\n<p>Subfamily (Aegypiinae) of the hawk family (Accipitridae). Each of the four species of Old World vultures is found in the Holy Land: the Egyptian, griffon, black, and bearded vulture (the bearded vulture is also known as the lammergeier). These birds range in size from the 24-inch (61-centimeters) Egyptian vulture to the huge bearded vulture, largest of all flying birds in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Most vultures are brown or black, having a short neck and a short, hooked bill with which they tear the dead animal flesh of which they are fond. All vultures, except the bearded, have bare or down-covered heads and necks, enabling these scavengers to penetrate deep into a carcass without spoiling the plumage. Excellent eyesight enables a vulture to locate a carcass from a lofty soaring position. Considering the decayed condition of most of its food, a vulture’s poor sense of smell may be a fortunate limitation. Vultures nest in any convenient place; both parents care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word usually translated “eagle” in the OT may have been a general term for all large birds of prey, including vultures. Thus many of the passages about eagles may refer to either the eagle or the vulture (cf. Lv 11:13; Dt 14:12, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). Such passages include references to nesting habits (Jb 39:27-28; Jer 49:16; Ob 1:4), care for fledglings (Dt 32:11), powers of flight (Ex 19:4; Dt 28:49; Jb 9:26; Lam 4:19), and extremely high soaring altitude (Prv 23:5; 30:19; Is 40:31). Despite variations among translations, the vulture clearly belongs in the list of unclean birds because of its foul diet (Lv 11:13, 18; Dt 14:12, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Several references to the eagle in the <span>kjv<\/span> have been changed to “vulture” in modern translations. The change seems appropriate in the references to the vulture as a sign of present or impending doom (Lam 4:19; Hos 8:1). Likewise the eye-plucking bird of Proverbs 30:17 is probably a vulture. The phrase “bald as the eagle” (Mi 1:16) clearly should read “bald as the vulture,” since there are no bald eagles in Israel and most vultures are bald. Since the vulture, like the eagle, was a symbol of sovereignty and domination in the ancient Near East, some gods were represented as vultures. Thus Ezekiel’s comparison of the kings of Babylon and Egypt to eagles may be conceived alternatively as comparisons to vultures (Ez 17:3, 7). Jesus’ reference to the eagles congregating around corpses at the end times (Mt 24:28) should also be revised to vultures, since eagles are usually solitary eaters, whereas vultures generally flock together around carrion.<\/p>\n<p>Several <span>kjv<\/span> references to vultures are usually translated “kite” or “falcon” in modern translations (cf. various versions of Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13; Jb 28:7; Is 34:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Kestrel; Kite; Lammergeier; Vulture, Black, or Osprey; Vulture, Egyptian; Vulture, Griffon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureBlackorOsprey\">Vulture, Black, or Osprey<\/p>\n<p>Diurnal flesh eater, a little over three feet (.9 meter) long with a wingspread of over three yards (2.7 meters). The feathers of the black or osprey vulture (<em>Aegypius monachus<\/em>) are black and the head and upper part of the neck are bald like those of other carrion eaters. It nests in the Jordan River valley and seems to have been abundant in biblical times. Today it is quite rare. The black vulture is probably the osprey of Leviticus 11:13 and Deuteronomy 14:12.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureEgyptian\">Vulture, Egyptian<\/p>\n<p>Also known as the gier eagle or as pharaoh’s hen. The plumage of the Egyptian vulture (<em>Neophron percnopterus<\/em>) is basically white with a naked head and yellow neck. The Egyptian vulture breaks bones left by other vultures. Its flight is slow and easy, and its voice is a croak. Measuring about 24 inches (61 centimeters) in length, it is the smallest of all the carrion-eating birds found in the Holy Land. It may be referred to in the list of unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17, “gier eagle,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “carrion vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>nlt<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureGriffon\">Vulture, Griffon<\/p>\n<p>One of the largest flying birds in the Holy Land <em>(Gyps fulvus).<\/em> Until a generation ago, the griffon vulture was one of the most common birds in the Holy Land. Today it is on the verge of extinction. Many have been killed by eating poisonous bait meant for foxes and jackals. In addition, its reproduction is limited; the female lays only one or two eggs a year.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture measures about four feet (121.9 centimeters) in length and up to ten feet (3 meters) between wing tips. Its beak is extremely strong, and its short toes are fitted with blunt talons. It is a light-brown bird with a pale yellow head and neck that are almost bare, being covered only with a very fine down.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture feeds mostly on carrion, but also on locusts and small tortoises. It is able to go without food for several days with no ill effects, but when it does break its fast, it gorges itself. It is found especially in the region of the Sea of Galilee. Most biblical references to the vulture are likely to be to the griffon vulture.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"WaterHen\">Water Hen<\/p>\n<p>Small water bird of the rail family. The water hen listed among unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:16, <span>rsv<\/span> only) may be the biblical bird most difficult to identify. Several alternatives have been suggested, including the swan (<span>kjv<\/span>), one of the owls (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>), or the marsh hen (<span>tlb<\/span>). Most scholars rule out the swan, since it is a vegetarian bird and thus should not be considered unclean. An owl remains a possibility.<\/p>\n<p>The marsh hen is a rail, several species of which inhabit Israel. One of those species is the purple gallinule <em>(Porphyrio porphyrio).<\/em> Rails are very thin birds varying from 6 to 20 inches (15 to 51 centimeters) in length. They live in marshes, where they eat a great variety of animal and vegetable matter, thus making them a candidate for inclusion in the Mosaic lists of unclean animals.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Animals.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIRDS Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture. Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult ...","summary_en":"BIRDS Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture. Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56217,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:34","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:34<\/strong> On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him <em>before the rooster crows tomorrow morning<\/em> (literally <em>before the rooster crows today<\/em>): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:34<\/strong> On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him <em>before the rooster crows tomorrow morning<\/em> (literally <em>before the rooster crows today<\/em>): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:34 On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him before the rooster crows tomorrow morning (literally before the rooster crows today): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.","summary_en":"22:34 On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him before the rooster crows tomorrow morning (literally before the rooster crows today): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83843,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:34","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:34<\/strong> On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him <em>before the rooster crows tomorrow morning<\/em> (literally <em>before the rooster crows today<\/em>): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:34<\/strong> On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him <em>before the rooster crows tomorrow morning<\/em> (literally <em>before the rooster crows today<\/em>): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:34 On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him before the rooster crows tomorrow morning (literally before the rooster crows today): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.","summary_en":"22:34 On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him before the rooster crows tomorrow morning (literally before the rooster crows today): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111469,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:34","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:34<\/strong> On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him <em>before the rooster crows tomorrow morning<\/em> (literally <em>before the rooster crows today<\/em>): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:34<\/strong> On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him <em>before the rooster crows tomorrow morning<\/em> (literally <em>before the rooster crows today<\/em>): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:34 On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him before the rooster crows tomorrow morning (literally before the rooster crows today): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.","summary_en":"22:34 On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him before the rooster crows tomorrow morning (literally before the rooster crows today): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139095,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:34","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:34<\/strong> On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him <em>before the rooster crows tomorrow morning<\/em> (literally <em>before the rooster crows today<\/em>): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:34<\/strong> On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him <em>before the rooster crows tomorrow morning<\/em> (literally <em>before the rooster crows today<\/em>): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:34 On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him before the rooster crows tomorrow morning (literally before the rooster crows today): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.","summary_en":"22:34 On Thursday evening, Jesus said that Peter would deny him before the rooster crows tomorrow morning (literally before the rooster crows today): This does not contradict Mark’s “this very night, before the rooster crows twice” (Mark 14:30); Luke and Matthew are simply more general, and in Jewish reckoning, sunset was the beginning of the next day.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"35":[{"id":29701,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Persecution","title_en":"Persecution","content_ro":"<h3>PERSECUTION<\/h3>\n<p>Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-treatment of Israel in Egypt, like her later oppression by the Philistines, Midianites, and others, had economic and political grounds. For those refusing to accept the royal policy of syncretism, official tolerance of injustice, and pagan immoralities, persecution becomes frequent—from Elijah’s period onward (1 Kgs 19:10). Later prophets, as spokesmen of uncompromising truth and the claims of divine law in the face of social evils, suffered severely at the hands of the ruling classes, so that persecution became, in Jewish eyes, the hallmark of the true prophet (2 Chr 36:15-16; Mt 5:12; 23:29-37; Acts 7:52; Heb 11:32-38).<\/p>\n<p>Daniel’s stories illustrate persecution during the exile. On the return under foreign rule, strict Jews sought to preserve the nation’s identity and religion amid alien pressures and the compromises of lax Jews anxious for accommodation and prosperity (1 Macc 1:11-15; 2:42-48). The result was the social oppression and harassment that made the repeated pleas for vindication and divine intervention, in such psalms as 10, 69, 140, and 149, painfully relevant in postexilic worship. This persecution reached a horrifying climax of cruelty during the Maccabean age, provoking armed resistance in response (2 Macc 6–7; Heb 11:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, despite her confidence in God’s sovereignty and “protection,” Israel learned that right does not always prosper in this world, that faithfulness to truth does not ensure immunity from suffering, sacrifice, or martyrdom.<\/p>\n<p>This acceptance of the high cost of righteousness was inherited by Christianity. Jesus repeatedly warned of persecution, even within households, and urged “armed” preparation for it, promising the Spirit’s assistance at judicial examinations (Mt 5:11-12; 10:16-23, 34-36; 23:34; Lk 6:26; 22:35-36). Jesus was deeply angered by the murder of John the Baptist by Herod (Lk 23:9), and he foresaw his own fate. Because he criticized the legalism and nationalism of the Pharisees, and the compromises of the Sadducees to protect their own privileges (Jn 11:47-50), and because he disappointed the militaristic hopes set upon the Messiah by the common people, Jesus knew he would be rejected. His call to discipleship came to include warnings of danger, reviling, slander, accusation, flogging, arraignment before courts, hatred, and death. He frankly invited followers to prepare for his crucifixion, as the only way to life and the kingdom (Mt 16:21-26; 20:17-22; Mk 10:29-30; Jn 15:18-25; 16:1-4). Jesus was killed on the charges of subverting the nation, forbidding payment of taxes to the Romans, and claiming to be king (Lk 23:2).<\/p>\n<p>The first persecution of the church by Jewish authorities was provoked mainly by Peter’s accusations concerning the murder of the Messiah. As apostolic influence increased, official action came to include imprisonment and beating (Acts 5:17, 40). The powerful advocacy of the Hellenist Stephen provoked a Jewish mob to stone him (Acts 6–7)—the signal for “a great persecution,” scattering most Christians from Jerusalem. The conversion of the archpersecutor Saul of Tarsus marked a resounding victory over opposition, and Herod’s sudden death just after attacking the church “to please the Jews” was another (Acts 12:1-3, 20-24).<\/p>\n<p>As Christianity moved into the Gentile world, a new cause of Jewish persecution arose as disturbances began to occur in the synagogues (Acts 13:44-45, 50; 14:1-6, 19; 17:1, 5, 13; 18:4-6, 12). In addition, the healing of the slave girl at Philippi led to the disciples’ imprisonment (16:19-24); at Ephesus, the effect of Christian preaching on the trade of idol makers occasioned a dangerous threat, which the authorities averted (19:23-41). Paul averted the plot of more than 40 men who vowed to ambush him and kill him (21:4-36; 23:12-15). And the book of Acts closes with Paul awaiting trial before Caesar (28:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout this period, persecution of Christians was sporadic, local, and mainly Jewish, provoked by envy of the church’s missionary success. Officially, Christianity, as a Jewish sect (Acts 24:5, 14), shared the state’s legal recognition won by the Jews. Thus, Paul received Roman protection at Paphos, Philippi, Corinth, Ephesus, and Jerusalem from governors Felix and Festus and their adviser Herod Agrippa, as well as from the centurion conveying him to Rome. This explains Paul’s confident appeal to Caesar; an imperial acquittal would ensure Christianity freedom from harassment throughout the empire.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s attitude to persecution included regretful remembrance of his own persecuting days (Acts 22:4; 26:9-11; Gal 1:22-24), deliberate acceptance of risks in obedience to Christ (Acts 20:22-24; 21:13), continual warning that tribulation is inseparable from discipleship (Acts 14:22; Rom 5:3; 12:12; 1 Thes 3:4), and assurance that in every form of tribulation Christians are more than conquerors (Rom 8:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>Almost certainly, Paul was beheaded during fierce persecution at Rome following the fire for which the Christians were blamed. Christians were often accused of “atheism” (rejecting polytheism), of appealing only to slave classes, of “scandalous” love feasts, and unsociable, austere behavior (cf. Jn 15:19), making them a popular target for blame.<\/p>\n<p>About this time, Peter warned Christians in the East of the danger confronting the church. For a little while, “various trials” only prove the genuineness of faith (1 Pt 1:6). Slander should be answered by blameless living. Honor should be paid to the authorities. Suffering for righteousness should be accepted without fear. Let Christians prepare respectful defenses, with consciences clear of blame. If they suffer for doing right, remember that Christ did too—for them. Thus they must “arm” themselves for suffering (4:1), and not be surprised at persecution as “something strange” (v 12). They are sharing Christ’s sufferings. His final word is “Stand fast!”<\/p>\n<p>Mark, too, is thought to have written at this time for the benefit of the suffering Roman church. His Gospel dwells upon Christ’s conflict, its causes and forms, and vividly portrays Christ’s own heroic death. Like Peter, Mark meets persecution by pointing back to the suffering Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhat later, Christianity was exposed as an “illegal religion,” no longer a protected sect of Judaism, by the introduction into synagogue services of a prayer against “Nazarenes,” which Christians could not offer. Thereafter, the church was liable to official suppression. Rome readily incorporated old, national religions into state rituals for the sake of imperial unity, but she resisted new, nonconformist movements, especially those with secret meetings (i.e., the Eucharist), as politically dangerous (cf. Acts 17:6-7).<\/p>\n<p>Toward the end of the century, faced with a growing church and political unrest, the state required public “worship” of “the genius of Rome” alongside any other religious rites. In Domitian’s reign (<span>AD<\/span> 81–96) this became worship of the living emperor, with elaborate temples and an official priesthood. When Christians refused, acknowledging Jesus alone as divine Lord, official, and increasingly barbaric, persecution began. It is probable that Revelation reflects this situation (Rv 1:9; 2:13; 6:9; 13; 19:2). So the Bible ends as it began, with the theme of the persecution of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Suffering; Tribulation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PERSECUTION<\/h3>\n<p>Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-treatment of Israel in Egypt, like her later oppression by the Philistines, Midianites, and others, had economic and political grounds. For those refusing to accept the royal policy of syncretism, official tolerance of injustice, and pagan immoralities, persecution becomes frequent—from Elijah’s period onward (1 Kgs 19:10). Later prophets, as spokesmen of uncompromising truth and the claims of divine law in the face of social evils, suffered severely at the hands of the ruling classes, so that persecution became, in Jewish eyes, the hallmark of the true prophet (2 Chr 36:15-16; Mt 5:12; 23:29-37; Acts 7:52; Heb 11:32-38).<\/p>\n<p>Daniel’s stories illustrate persecution during the exile. On the return under foreign rule, strict Jews sought to preserve the nation’s identity and religion amid alien pressures and the compromises of lax Jews anxious for accommodation and prosperity (1 Macc 1:11-15; 2:42-48). The result was the social oppression and harassment that made the repeated pleas for vindication and divine intervention, in such psalms as 10, 69, 140, and 149, painfully relevant in postexilic worship. This persecution reached a horrifying climax of cruelty during the Maccabean age, provoking armed resistance in response (2 Macc 6–7; Heb 11:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, despite her confidence in God’s sovereignty and “protection,” Israel learned that right does not always prosper in this world, that faithfulness to truth does not ensure immunity from suffering, sacrifice, or martyrdom.<\/p>\n<p>This acceptance of the high cost of righteousness was inherited by Christianity. Jesus repeatedly warned of persecution, even within households, and urged “armed” preparation for it, promising the Spirit’s assistance at judicial examinations (Mt 5:11-12; 10:16-23, 34-36; 23:34; Lk 6:26; 22:35-36). Jesus was deeply angered by the murder of John the Baptist by Herod (Lk 23:9), and he foresaw his own fate. Because he criticized the legalism and nationalism of the Pharisees, and the compromises of the Sadducees to protect their own privileges (Jn 11:47-50), and because he disappointed the militaristic hopes set upon the Messiah by the common people, Jesus knew he would be rejected. His call to discipleship came to include warnings of danger, reviling, slander, accusation, flogging, arraignment before courts, hatred, and death. He frankly invited followers to prepare for his crucifixion, as the only way to life and the kingdom (Mt 16:21-26; 20:17-22; Mk 10:29-30; Jn 15:18-25; 16:1-4). Jesus was killed on the charges of subverting the nation, forbidding payment of taxes to the Romans, and claiming to be king (Lk 23:2).<\/p>\n<p>The first persecution of the church by Jewish authorities was provoked mainly by Peter’s accusations concerning the murder of the Messiah. As apostolic influence increased, official action came to include imprisonment and beating (Acts 5:17, 40). The powerful advocacy of the Hellenist Stephen provoked a Jewish mob to stone him (Acts 6–7)—the signal for “a great persecution,” scattering most Christians from Jerusalem. The conversion of the archpersecutor Saul of Tarsus marked a resounding victory over opposition, and Herod’s sudden death just after attacking the church “to please the Jews” was another (Acts 12:1-3, 20-24).<\/p>\n<p>As Christianity moved into the Gentile world, a new cause of Jewish persecution arose as disturbances began to occur in the synagogues (Acts 13:44-45, 50; 14:1-6, 19; 17:1, 5, 13; 18:4-6, 12). In addition, the healing of the slave girl at Philippi led to the disciples’ imprisonment (16:19-24); at Ephesus, the effect of Christian preaching on the trade of idol makers occasioned a dangerous threat, which the authorities averted (19:23-41). Paul averted the plot of more than 40 men who vowed to ambush him and kill him (21:4-36; 23:12-15). And the book of Acts closes with Paul awaiting trial before Caesar (28:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout this period, persecution of Christians was sporadic, local, and mainly Jewish, provoked by envy of the church’s missionary success. Officially, Christianity, as a Jewish sect (Acts 24:5, 14), shared the state’s legal recognition won by the Jews. Thus, Paul received Roman protection at Paphos, Philippi, Corinth, Ephesus, and Jerusalem from governors Felix and Festus and their adviser Herod Agrippa, as well as from the centurion conveying him to Rome. This explains Paul’s confident appeal to Caesar; an imperial acquittal would ensure Christianity freedom from harassment throughout the empire.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s attitude to persecution included regretful remembrance of his own persecuting days (Acts 22:4; 26:9-11; Gal 1:22-24), deliberate acceptance of risks in obedience to Christ (Acts 20:22-24; 21:13), continual warning that tribulation is inseparable from discipleship (Acts 14:22; Rom 5:3; 12:12; 1 Thes 3:4), and assurance that in every form of tribulation Christians are more than conquerors (Rom 8:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>Almost certainly, Paul was beheaded during fierce persecution at Rome following the fire for which the Christians were blamed. Christians were often accused of “atheism” (rejecting polytheism), of appealing only to slave classes, of “scandalous” love feasts, and unsociable, austere behavior (cf. Jn 15:19), making them a popular target for blame.<\/p>\n<p>About this time, Peter warned Christians in the East of the danger confronting the church. For a little while, “various trials” only prove the genuineness of faith (1 Pt 1:6). Slander should be answered by blameless living. Honor should be paid to the authorities. Suffering for righteousness should be accepted without fear. Let Christians prepare respectful defenses, with consciences clear of blame. If they suffer for doing right, remember that Christ did too—for them. Thus they must “arm” themselves for suffering (4:1), and not be surprised at persecution as “something strange” (v 12). They are sharing Christ’s sufferings. His final word is “Stand fast!”<\/p>\n<p>Mark, too, is thought to have written at this time for the benefit of the suffering Roman church. His Gospel dwells upon Christ’s conflict, its causes and forms, and vividly portrays Christ’s own heroic death. Like Peter, Mark meets persecution by pointing back to the suffering Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhat later, Christianity was exposed as an “illegal religion,” no longer a protected sect of Judaism, by the introduction into synagogue services of a prayer against “Nazarenes,” which Christians could not offer. Thereafter, the church was liable to official suppression. Rome readily incorporated old, national religions into state rituals for the sake of imperial unity, but she resisted new, nonconformist movements, especially those with secret meetings (i.e., the Eucharist), as politically dangerous (cf. Acts 17:6-7).<\/p>\n<p>Toward the end of the century, faced with a growing church and political unrest, the state required public “worship” of “the genius of Rome” alongside any other religious rites. In Domitian’s reign (<span>AD<\/span> 81–96) this became worship of the living emperor, with elaborate temples and an official priesthood. When Christians refused, acknowledging Jesus alone as divine Lord, official, and increasingly barbaric, persecution began. It is probable that Revelation reflects this situation (Rv 1:9; 2:13; 6:9; 13; 19:2). So the Bible ends as it began, with the theme of the persecution of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Suffering; Tribulation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PERSECUTION Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-t...","summary_en":"PERSECUTION Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-t...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32196,"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}],"36":[{"id":56218,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:36","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:36<\/strong> <em>take your money and a traveler’s bag:<\/em> For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • <em>a sword:<\/em> Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphorically—they must prepare themselves for a violent crisis.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:36<\/strong> <em>take your money and a traveler’s bag:<\/em> For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • <em>a sword:<\/em> Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphorically—they must prepare themselves for a violent crisis.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:36 take your money and a traveler’s bag: For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • a sword: Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphor...","summary_en":"22:36 take your money and a traveler’s bag: For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • a sword: Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphor...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83844,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:36","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:36<\/strong> <em>take your money and a traveler’s bag:<\/em> For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • <em>a sword:<\/em> Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphorically—they must prepare themselves for a violent crisis.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:36<\/strong> <em>take your money and a traveler’s bag:<\/em> For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • <em>a sword:<\/em> Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphorically—they must prepare themselves for a violent crisis.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:36 take your money and a traveler’s bag: For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • a sword: Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphor...","summary_en":"22:36 take your money and a traveler’s bag: For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • a sword: Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphor...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111470,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:36","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:36<\/strong> <em>take your money and a traveler’s bag:<\/em> For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • <em>a sword:<\/em> Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphorically—they must prepare themselves for a violent crisis.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:36<\/strong> <em>take your money and a traveler’s bag:<\/em> For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • <em>a sword:<\/em> Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphorically—they must prepare themselves for a violent crisis.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:36 take your money and a traveler’s bag: For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • a sword: Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphor...","summary_en":"22:36 take your money and a traveler’s bag: For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • a sword: Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphor...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139096,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:36","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:36<\/strong> <em>take your money and a traveler’s bag:<\/em> For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • <em>a sword:<\/em> Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphorically—they must prepare themselves for a violent crisis.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:36<\/strong> <em>take your money and a traveler’s bag:<\/em> For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • <em>a sword:<\/em> Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphorically—they must prepare themselves for a violent crisis.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:36 take your money and a traveler’s bag: For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • a sword: Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphor...","summary_en":"22:36 take your money and a traveler’s bag: For their missions to Israel’s villages, the apostles had traveled without provisions and depended on others’ support (9:3; 10:3-4). In the dangerous days to come, they would have to plan more carefully. Jesus prepared his disciples for his suffering and death, and also for the establishing of the church and the worldwide proclamation of the Good News. • a sword: Jesus was probably not telling his followers to take up arms, but was speaking metaphor...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"37":[{"id":23510,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34476,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Servant of the Lord","title_en":"Servant of the Lord","content_ro":"<h3>SERVANT OF THE LORD<\/h3>\n<p>Title applied to a variety of persons in the Bible. The basic term, “servant,” covers a range of meanings. Used some 800 times in the OT alone, “servant” refers to a slave, to an officer close to the king, or to the chosen leader of God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah 41:8-9 defines this highest servanthood as something granted by God’s grace: “But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen . . . ; you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to you, ‘You are my servant. . . . ’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). This title is thus applicable to heroes of faith and action—to the patriarchs (Gn 26:24; Ez 28:25; 37:25), to Moses (Ex 14:31; 1 Kgs 8:53, 56), to David (2 Sm 7:26-29; Jer 33:21-26; Ez 37:24) and his descendants (as Hezekiah, Eliakim, Zerubbabel—Hg 2:23), to the prophets (2 Kgs 10:10; 14:25), and to other faithful Israelites, such as Joshua and Caleb (Nm 14:24; Jos 24:29; Jgs 2:8).<\/p>\n<p>Prophets other than Isaiah employ this term, but only Zechariah joins him in giving an apparently messianic prediction to this name. Zechariah 3:8 says, “Hear now, O Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who sit before you, for they are men of good omen: behold, I will bring my servant the Branch” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Some would see Zerubbabel as the individual in view here (cf. Zec 6:12); however, the use of “Branch” is decidedly messianic in Isaiah (Is 11:1) and Jeremiah (Jer 33:15).<\/p>\n<p>“<em>The<\/em> servant of the Lord,” in specialized biblical usage, points to the Messiah while also alluding to Isaiah’s central message. Though Isaiah, with others, employs “servant” with a range of significations, he composed some passages known as the Servant Songs. These distinctive sections of his book are distinguishable in content, but they cannot be extracted from the surrounding context without disrupting the flow of prophecy. Isaiah’s focus is on the future Messiah-servant. None can question the NT’s unanimous messianic interpretation of Isaiah’s servant, nor its application of this understanding to Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>A “servant Christology” pervades Acts (Acts 3:13, 26; 4:27, 30), and 1 Peter, with numerous allusions in the Gospels. Jesus himself quotes Isaiah 53 explicitly only in Luke 22:37, but he seems to allude to it in Mark 10:45, 14:24, and possibly 9:12. Peter not only emphasizes vicarious, redemptive suffering (1 Pt 2:21-25; 3:18) but seems to highlight the theme of Isaiah 53 in summing up OT prophecy (1:11) as predicting “the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.” Paul includes these elements (1 Cor 15:3; Phil 2:6-11; cf. Rom 4:25; 5:19; 2 Cor 5:21), and John’s “Lamb of God” title derives from Isaiah 53:7 no less than from the entire sacrificial system.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Isaiah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SERVANT OF THE LORD<\/h3>\n<p>Title applied to a variety of persons in the Bible. The basic term, “servant,” covers a range of meanings. Used some 800 times in the OT alone, “servant” refers to a slave, to an officer close to the king, or to the chosen leader of God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah 41:8-9 defines this highest servanthood as something granted by God’s grace: “But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen . . . ; you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to you, ‘You are my servant. . . . ’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). This title is thus applicable to heroes of faith and action—to the patriarchs (Gn 26:24; Ez 28:25; 37:25), to Moses (Ex 14:31; 1 Kgs 8:53, 56), to David (2 Sm 7:26-29; Jer 33:21-26; Ez 37:24) and his descendants (as Hezekiah, Eliakim, Zerubbabel—Hg 2:23), to the prophets (2 Kgs 10:10; 14:25), and to other faithful Israelites, such as Joshua and Caleb (Nm 14:24; Jos 24:29; Jgs 2:8).<\/p>\n<p>Prophets other than Isaiah employ this term, but only Zechariah joins him in giving an apparently messianic prediction to this name. Zechariah 3:8 says, “Hear now, O Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who sit before you, for they are men of good omen: behold, I will bring my servant the Branch” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Some would see Zerubbabel as the individual in view here (cf. Zec 6:12); however, the use of “Branch” is decidedly messianic in Isaiah (Is 11:1) and Jeremiah (Jer 33:15).<\/p>\n<p>“<em>The<\/em> servant of the Lord,” in specialized biblical usage, points to the Messiah while also alluding to Isaiah’s central message. Though Isaiah, with others, employs “servant” with a range of significations, he composed some passages known as the Servant Songs. These distinctive sections of his book are distinguishable in content, but they cannot be extracted from the surrounding context without disrupting the flow of prophecy. Isaiah’s focus is on the future Messiah-servant. None can question the NT’s unanimous messianic interpretation of Isaiah’s servant, nor its application of this understanding to Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>A “servant Christology” pervades Acts (Acts 3:13, 26; 4:27, 30), and 1 Peter, with numerous allusions in the Gospels. Jesus himself quotes Isaiah 53 explicitly only in Luke 22:37, but he seems to allude to it in Mark 10:45, 14:24, and possibly 9:12. Peter not only emphasizes vicarious, redemptive suffering (1 Pt 2:21-25; 3:18) but seems to highlight the theme of Isaiah 53 in summing up OT prophecy (1:11) as predicting “the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.” Paul includes these elements (1 Cor 15:3; Phil 2:6-11; cf. Rom 4:25; 5:19; 2 Cor 5:21), and John’s “Lamb of God” title derives from Isaiah 53:7 no less than from the entire sacrificial system.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Isaiah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SERVANT OF THE LORD Title applied to a variety of persons in the Bible. The basic term, “servant,” covers a range of meanings. Used some 800 times in the OT alone, “servant” refers to a slave, to an officer close to the king, or to the chosen leader of God’s people. Isaiah 41:8-9 defines this highest servanthood as something granted by God’s grace: “But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen . . . ; you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, s...","summary_en":"SERVANT OF THE LORD Title applied to a variety of persons in the Bible. The basic term, “servant,” covers a range of meanings. Used some 800 times in the OT alone, “servant” refers to a slave, to an officer close to the king, or to the chosen leader of God’s people. Isaiah 41:8-9 defines this highest servanthood as something granted by God’s grace: “But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen . . . ; you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, s...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65767,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Climax of Scripture","title_en":"The Climax of Scripture","content_ro":"<h3>The Climax of Scripture<\/h3>\n<p>The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him.<\/p>\n<p>The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might be even more—the Messiah! Their hopes were shattered, however, when he was arrested and crucified.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus responded by rebuking them for not reading the Scriptures attentively enough. The suffering of the Messiah was predicted all along in Scripture. Luke then relates how Jesus took the two disciples on a tour of Scripture, explaining to them “from all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27).<\/p>\n<p>Although Jesus does not specify which Old Testament passages speak of the suffering Messiah, various texts are cited elsewhere. Jesus is the rejected stone that becomes the cornerstone, the foundation for a new temple of God (Ps 118:22, cited in Luke 20:17); the suffering Servant of the Lord, who is treated like a common criminal (Isa 53:12, cited in Luke 22:37) and who is mocked, insulted and spit upon by his opponents (Isa 50:6, alluded to in Luke 18:32); the anointed king rejected by rulers and the people of Israel, but vindicated by God (Ps 2:1–2, cited in Acts 4:25–28); the descendant of David who will not be abandoned to the grave by God (Ps 16:8–11, cited in Acts 2:25–28).<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke 24:27, Jesus surveyed the whole story of Israel’s history and showed how it all leads to and climaxes in the coming of Jesus the Messiah, God’s agent of salvation. This is similar to how Paul describes Christ as having “accomplished the purpose for which the law was given” (Rom 10:4). All the Old Testament Scriptures—including the law of Moses, the prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44)—point to God’s story of salvation, which reaches its climax and ultimate purpose in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Luke 24:13-49; Rom 10:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Climax of Scripture<\/h3>\n<p>The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him.<\/p>\n<p>The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might be even more—the Messiah! Their hopes were shattered, however, when he was arrested and crucified.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus responded by rebuking them for not reading the Scriptures attentively enough. The suffering of the Messiah was predicted all along in Scripture. Luke then relates how Jesus took the two disciples on a tour of Scripture, explaining to them “from all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27).<\/p>\n<p>Although Jesus does not specify which Old Testament passages speak of the suffering Messiah, various texts are cited elsewhere. Jesus is the rejected stone that becomes the cornerstone, the foundation for a new temple of God (Ps 118:22, cited in Luke 20:17); the suffering Servant of the Lord, who is treated like a common criminal (Isa 53:12, cited in Luke 22:37) and who is mocked, insulted and spit upon by his opponents (Isa 50:6, alluded to in Luke 18:32); the anointed king rejected by rulers and the people of Israel, but vindicated by God (Ps 2:1–2, cited in Acts 4:25–28); the descendant of David who will not be abandoned to the grave by God (Ps 16:8–11, cited in Acts 2:25–28).<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke 24:27, Jesus surveyed the whole story of Israel’s history and showed how it all leads to and climaxes in the coming of Jesus the Messiah, God’s agent of salvation. This is similar to how Paul describes Christ as having “accomplished the purpose for which the law was given” (Rom 10:4). All the Old Testament Scriptures—including the law of Moses, the prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44)—point to God’s story of salvation, which reaches its climax and ultimate purpose in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Luke 24:13-49; Rom 10:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Climax of Scripture The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him. The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might...","summary_en":"The Climax of Scripture The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him. The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93393,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Climax of Scripture","title_en":"The Climax of Scripture","content_ro":"<h3>The Climax of Scripture<\/h3>\n<p>The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him.<\/p>\n<p>The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might be even more—the Messiah! Their hopes were shattered, however, when he was arrested and crucified.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus responded by rebuking them for not reading the Scriptures attentively enough. The suffering of the Messiah was predicted all along in Scripture. Luke then relates how Jesus took the two disciples on a tour of Scripture, explaining to them “from all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27).<\/p>\n<p>Although Jesus does not specify which Old Testament passages speak of the suffering Messiah, various texts are cited elsewhere. Jesus is the rejected stone that becomes the cornerstone, the foundation for a new temple of God (Ps 118:22, cited in Luke 20:17); the suffering Servant of the Lord, who is treated like a common criminal (Isa 53:12, cited in Luke 22:37) and who is mocked, insulted and spit upon by his opponents (Isa 50:6, alluded to in Luke 18:32); the anointed king rejected by rulers and the people of Israel, but vindicated by God (Ps 2:1–2, cited in Acts 4:25–28); the descendant of David who will not be abandoned to the grave by God (Ps 16:8–11, cited in Acts 2:25–28).<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke 24:27, Jesus surveyed the whole story of Israel’s history and showed how it all leads to and climaxes in the coming of Jesus the Messiah, God’s agent of salvation. This is similar to how Paul describes Christ as having “accomplished the purpose for which the law was given” (Rom 10:4). All the Old Testament Scriptures—including the law of Moses, the prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44)—point to God’s story of salvation, which reaches its climax and ultimate purpose in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Luke 24:13-49; Rom 10:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Climax of Scripture<\/h3>\n<p>The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him.<\/p>\n<p>The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might be even more—the Messiah! Their hopes were shattered, however, when he was arrested and crucified.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus responded by rebuking them for not reading the Scriptures attentively enough. The suffering of the Messiah was predicted all along in Scripture. Luke then relates how Jesus took the two disciples on a tour of Scripture, explaining to them “from all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27).<\/p>\n<p>Although Jesus does not specify which Old Testament passages speak of the suffering Messiah, various texts are cited elsewhere. Jesus is the rejected stone that becomes the cornerstone, the foundation for a new temple of God (Ps 118:22, cited in Luke 20:17); the suffering Servant of the Lord, who is treated like a common criminal (Isa 53:12, cited in Luke 22:37) and who is mocked, insulted and spit upon by his opponents (Isa 50:6, alluded to in Luke 18:32); the anointed king rejected by rulers and the people of Israel, but vindicated by God (Ps 2:1–2, cited in Acts 4:25–28); the descendant of David who will not be abandoned to the grave by God (Ps 16:8–11, cited in Acts 2:25–28).<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke 24:27, Jesus surveyed the whole story of Israel’s history and showed how it all leads to and climaxes in the coming of Jesus the Messiah, God’s agent of salvation. This is similar to how Paul describes Christ as having “accomplished the purpose for which the law was given” (Rom 10:4). All the Old Testament Scriptures—including the law of Moses, the prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44)—point to God’s story of salvation, which reaches its climax and ultimate purpose in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Luke 24:13-49; Rom 10:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Climax of Scripture The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him. The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might...","summary_en":"The Climax of Scripture The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him. The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121019,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Climax of Scripture","title_en":"The Climax of Scripture","content_ro":"<h3>The Climax of Scripture<\/h3>\n<p>The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him.<\/p>\n<p>The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might be even more—the Messiah! Their hopes were shattered, however, when he was arrested and crucified.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus responded by rebuking them for not reading the Scriptures attentively enough. The suffering of the Messiah was predicted all along in Scripture. Luke then relates how Jesus took the two disciples on a tour of Scripture, explaining to them “from all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27).<\/p>\n<p>Although Jesus does not specify which Old Testament passages speak of the suffering Messiah, various texts are cited elsewhere. Jesus is the rejected stone that becomes the cornerstone, the foundation for a new temple of God (Ps 118:22, cited in Luke 20:17); the suffering Servant of the Lord, who is treated like a common criminal (Isa 53:12, cited in Luke 22:37) and who is mocked, insulted and spit upon by his opponents (Isa 50:6, alluded to in Luke 18:32); the anointed king rejected by rulers and the people of Israel, but vindicated by God (Ps 2:1–2, cited in Acts 4:25–28); the descendant of David who will not be abandoned to the grave by God (Ps 16:8–11, cited in Acts 2:25–28).<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke 24:27, Jesus surveyed the whole story of Israel’s history and showed how it all leads to and climaxes in the coming of Jesus the Messiah, God’s agent of salvation. This is similar to how Paul describes Christ as having “accomplished the purpose for which the law was given” (Rom 10:4). All the Old Testament Scriptures—including the law of Moses, the prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44)—point to God’s story of salvation, which reaches its climax and ultimate purpose in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Luke 24:13-49; Rom 10:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Climax of Scripture<\/h3>\n<p>The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him.<\/p>\n<p>The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might be even more—the Messiah! Their hopes were shattered, however, when he was arrested and crucified.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus responded by rebuking them for not reading the Scriptures attentively enough. The suffering of the Messiah was predicted all along in Scripture. Luke then relates how Jesus took the two disciples on a tour of Scripture, explaining to them “from all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27).<\/p>\n<p>Although Jesus does not specify which Old Testament passages speak of the suffering Messiah, various texts are cited elsewhere. Jesus is the rejected stone that becomes the cornerstone, the foundation for a new temple of God (Ps 118:22, cited in Luke 20:17); the suffering Servant of the Lord, who is treated like a common criminal (Isa 53:12, cited in Luke 22:37) and who is mocked, insulted and spit upon by his opponents (Isa 50:6, alluded to in Luke 18:32); the anointed king rejected by rulers and the people of Israel, but vindicated by God (Ps 2:1–2, cited in Acts 4:25–28); the descendant of David who will not be abandoned to the grave by God (Ps 16:8–11, cited in Acts 2:25–28).<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke 24:27, Jesus surveyed the whole story of Israel’s history and showed how it all leads to and climaxes in the coming of Jesus the Messiah, God’s agent of salvation. This is similar to how Paul describes Christ as having “accomplished the purpose for which the law was given” (Rom 10:4). All the Old Testament Scriptures—including the law of Moses, the prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44)—point to God’s story of salvation, which reaches its climax and ultimate purpose in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Luke 24:13-49; Rom 10:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Climax of Scripture The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him. The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might...","summary_en":"The Climax of Scripture The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him. The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148645,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Climax of Scripture","title_en":"The Climax of Scripture","content_ro":"<h3>The Climax of Scripture<\/h3>\n<p>The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him.<\/p>\n<p>The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might be even more—the Messiah! Their hopes were shattered, however, when he was arrested and crucified.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus responded by rebuking them for not reading the Scriptures attentively enough. The suffering of the Messiah was predicted all along in Scripture. Luke then relates how Jesus took the two disciples on a tour of Scripture, explaining to them “from all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27).<\/p>\n<p>Although Jesus does not specify which Old Testament passages speak of the suffering Messiah, various texts are cited elsewhere. Jesus is the rejected stone that becomes the cornerstone, the foundation for a new temple of God (Ps 118:22, cited in Luke 20:17); the suffering Servant of the Lord, who is treated like a common criminal (Isa 53:12, cited in Luke 22:37) and who is mocked, insulted and spit upon by his opponents (Isa 50:6, alluded to in Luke 18:32); the anointed king rejected by rulers and the people of Israel, but vindicated by God (Ps 2:1–2, cited in Acts 4:25–28); the descendant of David who will not be abandoned to the grave by God (Ps 16:8–11, cited in Acts 2:25–28).<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke 24:27, Jesus surveyed the whole story of Israel’s history and showed how it all leads to and climaxes in the coming of Jesus the Messiah, God’s agent of salvation. This is similar to how Paul describes Christ as having “accomplished the purpose for which the law was given” (Rom 10:4). All the Old Testament Scriptures—including the law of Moses, the prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44)—point to God’s story of salvation, which reaches its climax and ultimate purpose in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Luke 24:13-49; Rom 10:4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Climax of Scripture<\/h3>\n<p>The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him.<\/p>\n<p>The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might be even more—the Messiah! Their hopes were shattered, however, when he was arrested and crucified.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus responded by rebuking them for not reading the Scriptures attentively enough. The suffering of the Messiah was predicted all along in Scripture. Luke then relates how Jesus took the two disciples on a tour of Scripture, explaining to them “from all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27).<\/p>\n<p>Although Jesus does not specify which Old Testament passages speak of the suffering Messiah, various texts are cited elsewhere. Jesus is the rejected stone that becomes the cornerstone, the foundation for a new temple of God (Ps 118:22, cited in Luke 20:17); the suffering Servant of the Lord, who is treated like a common criminal (Isa 53:12, cited in Luke 22:37) and who is mocked, insulted and spit upon by his opponents (Isa 50:6, alluded to in Luke 18:32); the anointed king rejected by rulers and the people of Israel, but vindicated by God (Ps 2:1–2, cited in Acts 4:25–28); the descendant of David who will not be abandoned to the grave by God (Ps 16:8–11, cited in Acts 2:25–28).<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke 24:27, Jesus surveyed the whole story of Israel’s history and showed how it all leads to and climaxes in the coming of Jesus the Messiah, God’s agent of salvation. This is similar to how Paul describes Christ as having “accomplished the purpose for which the law was given” (Rom 10:4). All the Old Testament Scriptures—including the law of Moses, the prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44)—point to God’s story of salvation, which reaches its climax and ultimate purpose in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Luke 24:13-49; Rom 10:4<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Climax of Scripture The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him. The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might...","summary_en":"The Climax of Scripture The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is significant not only as a resurrection appearance—and so as proof of Jesus’ victory over death—but also as a key moment of revelation concerning the role of the Messiah and the Old Testament prophecies about him. The two disciples pointed out to their anonymous traveling companion that this man named Jesus had shown himself to be a great prophet through his teaching and miracles. But they had hoped that he might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"38":[{"id":56219,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:38","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:38<\/strong> <em>That’s enough:<\/em> The disciples’ <em>two swords<\/em> were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 <em>\/\/<\/em> Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:38<\/strong> <em>That’s enough:<\/em> The disciples’ <em>two swords<\/em> were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 <em>\/\/<\/em> Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:38 That’s enough: The disciples’ two swords were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 \/\/ Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”","summary_en":"22:38 That’s enough: The disciples’ two swords were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 \/\/ Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83845,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:38","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:38<\/strong> <em>That’s enough:<\/em> The disciples’ <em>two swords<\/em> were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 <em>\/\/<\/em> Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:38<\/strong> <em>That’s enough:<\/em> The disciples’ <em>two swords<\/em> were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 <em>\/\/<\/em> Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:38 That’s enough: The disciples’ two swords were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 \/\/ Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”","summary_en":"22:38 That’s enough: The disciples’ two swords were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 \/\/ Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111471,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:38","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:38<\/strong> <em>That’s enough:<\/em> The disciples’ <em>two swords<\/em> were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 <em>\/\/<\/em> Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:38<\/strong> <em>That’s enough:<\/em> The disciples’ <em>two swords<\/em> were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 <em>\/\/<\/em> Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:38 That’s enough: The disciples’ two swords were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 \/\/ Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”","summary_en":"22:38 That’s enough: The disciples’ two swords were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 \/\/ Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139097,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:38","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:38<\/strong> <em>That’s enough:<\/em> The disciples’ <em>two swords<\/em> were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 <em>\/\/<\/em> Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:38<\/strong> <em>That’s enough:<\/em> The disciples’ <em>two swords<\/em> were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 <em>\/\/<\/em> Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:38 That’s enough: The disciples’ two swords were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 \/\/ Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”","summary_en":"22:38 That’s enough: The disciples’ two swords were probably not enough to defend the whole group, and Jesus elsewhere rejected violence (22:49-51 \/\/ Matt 26:52). Jesus might have meant that two swords were sufficient to fulfill Isa 53:12. Or perhaps he meant, “Enough of this foolish talk—you are misunderstanding me.”","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"39":[{"id":10478,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Eli, Eli, Lama Sabachthani?*","title_en":"Eli, Eli, Lama Sabachthani?*","content_ro":"<h3>ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?*<\/h3>\n<p>One of Jesus’ cries from the cross, properly translated “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (The <span>nlt<\/span> uses an alternate spelling, “lema,” for the third word in the expression.) This form of the “cry of dereliction” (Mt 27:46) is slightly different from its other recorded form, “Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mk 15:34). Both versions are adaptations of Psalm 22:1 in the Aramaic, the common language of first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine. The only difference in the two accounts is that Mark’s version is completely Aramaic, whereas Matthew retains the Hebrew word for God (which was not uncommon for Aramaic-speaking Jews). The fact that some of Jesus’ hearers thought he was calling Elijah indicates that Matthew’s version is probably the original. Elias (Elijah) could have been confused with “Eli” more easily than with “Eloi” (Mt 27:47; Mk 15:35).<\/p>\n<p>The textual variants that exist suggest the difficulties copyists and interpreters have had with Jesus’ words. After meditating on the passage, Martin Luther exclaimed, “God forsaken of God! Who can understand it?” Luther’s statement of the major theological problem, that Jesus was forsaken by God, is not the only possible understanding of the text. Debate has focused on two questions: whether in fact abandonment by God was expressed by Jesus’ use of the psalmist’s words, and why the onlookers spoke of Elijah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MeaningoftheCry\">Meaning of the Cry<\/p>\n<p>At one extreme, many have been struck by the starkness of Jesus’ words. Some have even seen in them a realization on the cross that he had failed and that all hope was lost for the coming of God’s kingdom. From that perspective Jesus’ words were a cry of despair over a lost cause. However, such a view hardly fits the rest of the NT presentation of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At the opposite extreme, some interpret the words as neither stark nor negative in any sense. They view the cry as an affirmation of Jesus’ faith in committing himself to God (Lk 23:46). To such interpreters, the fact that Jesus began his question with “My God, my God” and used a biblical quotation indicates religious reverence and continued faith. In Jewish practice sometimes the first line of a psalm or song would be quoted to refer to the whole work. Hence Jesus might have been quoting Psalm 22:1 as a way of referring to the whole psalm. Psalm 22 is clearly the lament of a righteous sufferer. Psalms of lament always expressed a prayer of confidence in God and praise to God as well as a prayer for help from God. Thus, from a certain point of view, the cry from the cross can be seen as a confident prayer.<\/p>\n<p>Many biblical scholars find the second view as unconvincing as the first. The Gospel writers did not clarify the meaning of the cry. Yet if the words were an expression of confidence or praise, some indication would be expected in the text. As they stand, the words are hardly an expression of religious reverence. The words themselves and the fact they were expressed in a loud cry do not suggest a prayer of confidence or praise.<\/p>\n<p>Another approach views the words as expressing Jesus’ feeling of isolation in a moment of extreme anguish but rejects the notion that he was actually forsaken by God.<\/p>\n<p>But the interpretation that has become “traditional” is that Jesus <em>was<\/em> forsaken by God. In that view the context of the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:39-46) indicates the kind of conflict expressed in Jesus’ cry on the cross. Jesus’ identification with sinners was so real that taking on their sin broke the closeness of his communion with the Father. Thus, Jesus’ abandonment by God is seen as an important aspect of the atonement. Although stressing that Jesus was actually forsaken, the traditional view goes on to stress that the unity of the Trinity remained unbroken.<\/p>\n<p>The explanation of such a paradox is not easy. Some view it as a divine mystery and make no attempt to explain it at all. Others attempt to make some kind of distinction between what happened on the cross and the reality of God’s being. For example, in the early centuries of the church the view was expressed that only Jesus’ humanity was affected by the separation, so that his deity remained intact with God. Others argue that Jesus was separated from the Father “functionally” in the work of salvation but not “really” with respect to his existence.<\/p>\n<p>The refusal of the Gospel writers to explain Jesus’ cry should make scholars hesitate to give precise or dogmatic explanations. At the least, one can confidently state that (1) the cry reflects the reality of Jesus’ humanity in the face of death, (2) the particular kind of death (“even death on a cross,” Phil 2:8) was especially scandalous, and (3) Christ’s identification with sinners was a horribly painful experience. Thus, although the cry is somehow related to the Atonement, the biblical texts do not discuss whether Jesus was absolutely abandoned. Further, they do not explain how God could recoil from sin at the same time that “in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself” (2 Cor 5:19). In doing justice to the depth of emotion expressed in the cry, one should be cautious not to force the text to say something the author did not intend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ElijahandtheCry\">Elijah and the Cry<\/p>\n<p>Various possibilities of connections between the cry and Elijah have been offered. If the cry refers to the whole of Psalm 22, mention of Elijah by the bystanders would show that they understood Jesus’ words as expressing confidence in salvation. A salvation mediated by Elijah would have seemed natural to the Jews, who often saw Elijah as a deliverer of the righteous oppressed. Others claim that the bystanders were willfully and maliciously distorting Jesus’ words in order to mock him. Still others view the mention of Elijah as an honest misunderstanding because of the similarity of the words. The view that one adopts will depend to some extent on how Jesus’ cry is understood.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crucifixion; Seven Last Sayings of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?*<\/h3>\n<p>One of Jesus’ cries from the cross, properly translated “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (The <span>nlt<\/span> uses an alternate spelling, “lema,” for the third word in the expression.) This form of the “cry of dereliction” (Mt 27:46) is slightly different from its other recorded form, “Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mk 15:34). Both versions are adaptations of Psalm 22:1 in the Aramaic, the common language of first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine. The only difference in the two accounts is that Mark’s version is completely Aramaic, whereas Matthew retains the Hebrew word for God (which was not uncommon for Aramaic-speaking Jews). The fact that some of Jesus’ hearers thought he was calling Elijah indicates that Matthew’s version is probably the original. Elias (Elijah) could have been confused with “Eli” more easily than with “Eloi” (Mt 27:47; Mk 15:35).<\/p>\n<p>The textual variants that exist suggest the difficulties copyists and interpreters have had with Jesus’ words. After meditating on the passage, Martin Luther exclaimed, “God forsaken of God! Who can understand it?” Luther’s statement of the major theological problem, that Jesus was forsaken by God, is not the only possible understanding of the text. Debate has focused on two questions: whether in fact abandonment by God was expressed by Jesus’ use of the psalmist’s words, and why the onlookers spoke of Elijah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MeaningoftheCry\">Meaning of the Cry<\/p>\n<p>At one extreme, many have been struck by the starkness of Jesus’ words. Some have even seen in them a realization on the cross that he had failed and that all hope was lost for the coming of God’s kingdom. From that perspective Jesus’ words were a cry of despair over a lost cause. However, such a view hardly fits the rest of the NT presentation of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At the opposite extreme, some interpret the words as neither stark nor negative in any sense. They view the cry as an affirmation of Jesus’ faith in committing himself to God (Lk 23:46). To such interpreters, the fact that Jesus began his question with “My God, my God” and used a biblical quotation indicates religious reverence and continued faith. In Jewish practice sometimes the first line of a psalm or song would be quoted to refer to the whole work. Hence Jesus might have been quoting Psalm 22:1 as a way of referring to the whole psalm. Psalm 22 is clearly the lament of a righteous sufferer. Psalms of lament always expressed a prayer of confidence in God and praise to God as well as a prayer for help from God. Thus, from a certain point of view, the cry from the cross can be seen as a confident prayer.<\/p>\n<p>Many biblical scholars find the second view as unconvincing as the first. The Gospel writers did not clarify the meaning of the cry. Yet if the words were an expression of confidence or praise, some indication would be expected in the text. As they stand, the words are hardly an expression of religious reverence. The words themselves and the fact they were expressed in a loud cry do not suggest a prayer of confidence or praise.<\/p>\n<p>Another approach views the words as expressing Jesus’ feeling of isolation in a moment of extreme anguish but rejects the notion that he was actually forsaken by God.<\/p>\n<p>But the interpretation that has become “traditional” is that Jesus <em>was<\/em> forsaken by God. In that view the context of the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:39-46) indicates the kind of conflict expressed in Jesus’ cry on the cross. Jesus’ identification with sinners was so real that taking on their sin broke the closeness of his communion with the Father. Thus, Jesus’ abandonment by God is seen as an important aspect of the atonement. Although stressing that Jesus was actually forsaken, the traditional view goes on to stress that the unity of the Trinity remained unbroken.<\/p>\n<p>The explanation of such a paradox is not easy. Some view it as a divine mystery and make no attempt to explain it at all. Others attempt to make some kind of distinction between what happened on the cross and the reality of God’s being. For example, in the early centuries of the church the view was expressed that only Jesus’ humanity was affected by the separation, so that his deity remained intact with God. Others argue that Jesus was separated from the Father “functionally” in the work of salvation but not “really” with respect to his existence.<\/p>\n<p>The refusal of the Gospel writers to explain Jesus’ cry should make scholars hesitate to give precise or dogmatic explanations. At the least, one can confidently state that (1) the cry reflects the reality of Jesus’ humanity in the face of death, (2) the particular kind of death (“even death on a cross,” Phil 2:8) was especially scandalous, and (3) Christ’s identification with sinners was a horribly painful experience. Thus, although the cry is somehow related to the Atonement, the biblical texts do not discuss whether Jesus was absolutely abandoned. Further, they do not explain how God could recoil from sin at the same time that “in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself” (2 Cor 5:19). In doing justice to the depth of emotion expressed in the cry, one should be cautious not to force the text to say something the author did not intend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ElijahandtheCry\">Elijah and the Cry<\/p>\n<p>Various possibilities of connections between the cry and Elijah have been offered. If the cry refers to the whole of Psalm 22, mention of Elijah by the bystanders would show that they understood Jesus’ words as expressing confidence in salvation. A salvation mediated by Elijah would have seemed natural to the Jews, who often saw Elijah as a deliverer of the righteous oppressed. Others claim that the bystanders were willfully and maliciously distorting Jesus’ words in order to mock him. Still others view the mention of Elijah as an honest misunderstanding because of the similarity of the words. The view that one adopts will depend to some extent on how Jesus’ cry is understood.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crucifixion; Seven Last Sayings of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?* One of Jesus’ cries from the cross, properly translated “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (The nlt uses an alternate spelling, “lema,” for the third word in the expression.) This form of the “cry of dereliction” (Mt 27:46) is slightly different from its other recorded form, “Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mk 15:34). Both versions are adaptations of Psalm 22:1 in the Aramaic, the common language of first-century AD Palestine. The only difference in the t...","summary_en":"ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?* One of Jesus’ cries from the cross, properly translated “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (The nlt uses an alternate spelling, “lema,” for the third word in the expression.) This form of the “cry of dereliction” (Mt 27:46) is slightly different from its other recorded form, “Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mk 15:34). Both versions are adaptations of Psalm 22:1 in the Aramaic, the common language of first-century AD Palestine. The only difference in the t...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13717,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gethsemane","title_en":"Gethsemane","content_ro":"<h3>GETHSEMANE<\/h3>\n<p>Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53).<\/p>\n<p>The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclosed piece of ground. It may be that the grove was privately owned and that Jesus and his disciples had special permission to enter.<\/p>\n<p>Though the Gospels of Luke and John do not mention the word Gethsemane, they both record Jesus’ agony before his betrayal. Luke says the location was on the “Mount of Olives” (Lk 22:39). John describes the area as “across the Kidron Valley” (Jn 18:1); John’s is the only Gospel to call the spot a garden. From those accounts it is also evident that Jesus and his disciples gathered in Gethsemane often for fellowship and prayer (Lk 22:39; Jn 18:2). The Gospel narratives indicate that the garden was large enough for the group to separate into different parts of it.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GETHSEMANE<\/h3>\n<p>Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53).<\/p>\n<p>The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclosed piece of ground. It may be that the grove was privately owned and that Jesus and his disciples had special permission to enter.<\/p>\n<p>Though the Gospels of Luke and John do not mention the word Gethsemane, they both record Jesus’ agony before his betrayal. Luke says the location was on the “Mount of Olives” (Lk 22:39). John describes the area as “across the Kidron Valley” (Jn 18:1); John’s is the only Gospel to call the spot a garden. From those accounts it is also evident that Jesus and his disciples gathered in Gethsemane often for fellowship and prayer (Lk 22:39; Jn 18:2). The Gospel narratives indicate that the garden was large enough for the group to separate into different parts of it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GETHSEMANE Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53). The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclo...","summary_en":"GETHSEMANE Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53). The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclo...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56220,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:39","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:39<\/strong> <em>Mount of Olives:<\/em> See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:39<\/strong> <em>Mount of Olives:<\/em> See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:39 Mount of Olives: See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).","summary_en":"22:39 Mount of Olives: See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83846,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:39","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:39<\/strong> <em>Mount of Olives:<\/em> See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:39<\/strong> <em>Mount of Olives:<\/em> See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:39 Mount of Olives: See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).","summary_en":"22:39 Mount of Olives: See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111472,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:39","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:39<\/strong> <em>Mount of Olives:<\/em> See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:39<\/strong> <em>Mount of Olives:<\/em> See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:39 Mount of Olives: See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).","summary_en":"22:39 Mount of Olives: See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139098,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:39","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:39<\/strong> <em>Mount of Olives:<\/em> See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:39<\/strong> <em>Mount of Olives:<\/em> See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:39 Mount of Olives: See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).","summary_en":"22:39 Mount of Olives: See study note on 19:29. This was the location of the Garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:36; Mark 14:32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65734,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93360,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120986,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148612,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"40":[{"id":19558,"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}],"41":[{"id":22245,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kneeling","title_en":"Kneeling","content_ro":"<h3>KNEELING<\/h3>\n<p>Position often denoting worship, respect, or submission. A strong knee symbolically implied a man with strength of faith and purpose, and thus bowing the knee indicated submission to a superior. The knee was bowed before a king, a ruler, a governor, or God. Genesis 41:43 describes the people who were kneeling before Pharaoh and Joseph. Kneeling in reverence before the Lord was common (Is 45:23; Rom 14:11; Phil 2:10). In a time of famine, when the Israelites turned away from the Lord, those who remained faithful were described as “all the knees that have not bowed to Baal” (1 Kgs 19:18, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Rom 11:4).<\/p>\n<p>As firm knees represented strength, so smiting those knees represented the destruction of power (Dt 28:35). Isaiah pleaded with the Lord for the strengthening of weak knees (Is 35:3). References to weak or feeble knees were generally used to show a lack of firmness of faith (Jb 4:4; Heb 12:12) but could sometimes refer to failing health (Ps 109:24). Ezekiel referred to those who had knees “as weak as water” (Ez 7:17; 21:7).<\/p>\n<p>Kneeling before the Lord was a posture representing worship (Ps 95:6) and also prayer (Dn 6:10). Christ himself knelt to pray in the garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41), and Peter, Paul, and Stephen all did the same (Acts 7:60; 9:40; 20:36; 21:5). Solomon knelt in prayer and supplication before the Lord (1 Kgs 8:54), and even on one occasion had a scaffold built so that he could climb up and be seen by the whole congregation of Israel kneeling before the Lord (2 Chr 6:13).<\/p>\n<p>Some knelt in penitence, as Ezra did at the evening sacrifice (Ezr 9:5) and as Peter did when begging the Lord’s forgiveness for his lack of faith and trust (Lk 5:8). Those who were beseeching the prophet Elijah knelt before him as God’s representative (2 Kgs 1:13), and many came kneeling and begging the Lord for healing (Mt 17:14; Mk 1:40). Daniel knelt in wonder and awe before an angel (Dn 10:10), and a sign of Belshazzar’s fear was that his “knees knocked together” (Dn 5:6). In the NT a regal and patient Christ is subjected to the taunting and mockery of the soldiers who knelt before him and sarcastically cried, “Hail, King of the Jews” (Mt 27:29; Mk 15:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KNEELING<\/h3>\n<p>Position often denoting worship, respect, or submission. A strong knee symbolically implied a man with strength of faith and purpose, and thus bowing the knee indicated submission to a superior. The knee was bowed before a king, a ruler, a governor, or God. Genesis 41:43 describes the people who were kneeling before Pharaoh and Joseph. Kneeling in reverence before the Lord was common (Is 45:23; Rom 14:11; Phil 2:10). In a time of famine, when the Israelites turned away from the Lord, those who remained faithful were described as “all the knees that have not bowed to Baal” (1 Kgs 19:18, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Rom 11:4).<\/p>\n<p>As firm knees represented strength, so smiting those knees represented the destruction of power (Dt 28:35). Isaiah pleaded with the Lord for the strengthening of weak knees (Is 35:3). References to weak or feeble knees were generally used to show a lack of firmness of faith (Jb 4:4; Heb 12:12) but could sometimes refer to failing health (Ps 109:24). Ezekiel referred to those who had knees “as weak as water” (Ez 7:17; 21:7).<\/p>\n<p>Kneeling before the Lord was a posture representing worship (Ps 95:6) and also prayer (Dn 6:10). Christ himself knelt to pray in the garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41), and Peter, Paul, and Stephen all did the same (Acts 7:60; 9:40; 20:36; 21:5). Solomon knelt in prayer and supplication before the Lord (1 Kgs 8:54), and even on one occasion had a scaffold built so that he could climb up and be seen by the whole congregation of Israel kneeling before the Lord (2 Chr 6:13).<\/p>\n<p>Some knelt in penitence, as Ezra did at the evening sacrifice (Ezr 9:5) and as Peter did when begging the Lord’s forgiveness for his lack of faith and trust (Lk 5:8). Those who were beseeching the prophet Elijah knelt before him as God’s representative (2 Kgs 1:13), and many came kneeling and begging the Lord for healing (Mt 17:14; Mk 1:40). Daniel knelt in wonder and awe before an angel (Dn 10:10), and a sign of Belshazzar’s fear was that his “knees knocked together” (Dn 5:6). In the NT a regal and patient Christ is subjected to the taunting and mockery of the soldiers who knelt before him and sarcastically cried, “Hail, King of the Jews” (Mt 27:29; Mk 15:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"KNEELING Position often denoting worship, respect, or submission. A strong knee symbolically implied a man with strength of faith and purpose, and thus bowing the knee indicated submission to a superior. The knee was bowed before a king, a ruler, a governor, or God. Genesis 41:43 describes the people who were kneeling before Pharaoh and Joseph. Kneeling in reverence before the Lord was common (Is 45:23; Rom 14:11; Phil 2:10). In a time of famine, when the Israelites turned away from the Lord,...","summary_en":"KNEELING Position often denoting worship, respect, or submission. A strong knee symbolically implied a man with strength of faith and purpose, and thus bowing the knee indicated submission to a superior. The knee was bowed before a king, a ruler, a governor, or God. Genesis 41:43 describes the people who were kneeling before Pharaoh and Joseph. Kneeling in reverence before the Lord was common (Is 45:23; Rom 14:11; Phil 2:10). In a time of famine, when the Israelites turned away from the Lord,...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28938,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Passion*","title_en":"Passion*","content_ro":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","summary_en":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"42":[{"id":8295,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cup","title_en":"Cup","content_ro":"<h3>CUP<\/h3>\n<p>The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively.<\/p>\n<p>1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs.<\/p>\n<li>2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8; Is 51:17, 22; Jer 49:12; Ez 23:33; Zec 12:2; Rv 14:10; 16:19; 18:6), the Lord (1 Cor 10:21), prosperity or blessing (Ps 23:5), salvation (Ps 116:13), suffering (Mt 20:22; 26:39; Mk 10:39; 14:36; Lk 22:42; Jn 18:11), and thanksgiving (1 Cor 10:16).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cup of Blessing.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CUP<\/h3>\n<p>The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively.<\/p>\n<p>1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs.<\/p>\n<li>2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8; Is 51:17, 22; Jer 49:12; Ez 23:33; Zec 12:2; Rv 14:10; 16:19; 18:6), the Lord (1 Cor 10:21), prosperity or blessing (Ps 23:5), salvation (Ps 116:13), suffering (Mt 20:22; 26:39; Mk 10:39; 14:36; Lk 22:42; Jn 18:11), and thanksgiving (1 Cor 10:16).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cup of Blessing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CUP The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively. 1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs. 2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8...","summary_en":"CUP The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively. 1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs. 2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17337,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Incarnation*","title_en":"Incarnation*","content_ro":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","summary_en":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56221,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:42","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:42","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:42<\/strong> <em>please take this cup of suffering away:<\/em> A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:42<\/strong> <em>please take this cup of suffering away:<\/em> A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:42 please take this cup of suffering away: A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.","summary_en":"22:42 please take this cup of suffering away: A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83847,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:42","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:42","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:42<\/strong> <em>please take this cup of suffering away:<\/em> A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:42<\/strong> <em>please take this cup of suffering away:<\/em> A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:42 please take this cup of suffering away: A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.","summary_en":"22:42 please take this cup of suffering away: A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111473,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:42","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:42","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:42<\/strong> <em>please take this cup of suffering away:<\/em> A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:42<\/strong> <em>please take this cup of suffering away:<\/em> A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:42 please take this cup of suffering away: A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.","summary_en":"22:42 please take this cup of suffering away: A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139099,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:42","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:42","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:42<\/strong> <em>please take this cup of suffering away:<\/em> A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:42<\/strong> <em>please take this cup of suffering away:<\/em> A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:42 please take this cup of suffering away: A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.","summary_en":"22:42 please take this cup of suffering away: A cup is a metaphor for experiencing either judgment or blessing (see, e.g., Pss 23:5; 75:8; 116:13; Isa 51:17). Jesus felt all the emotions of his humanity, including fear and anxiety.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65730,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93356,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120982,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148608,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers","title_en":"Jesus’ Prayers","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Prayers<\/h3>\n<p>In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ prayers are part of Luke’s emphasis on the intimacy between the Father and the Son. Jesus lived in communion with the Father, followed the Father’s purpose, and remained faithful to the Father’s will. In Gethsemane, Jesus agonized over the suffering that lay ahead, but he prayed, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Luke 22:42). On the cross, he expressed total dependence on the Father, uttering as his last words, “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands!” (Luke 23:46). Jesus modeled for us a life of trust and dependence on our heavenly Father.<\/p>\n<p>John records a prayer of Jesus on his final night with the disciples, often referred to as the High Priestly Prayer (John 17:1-26). In this prayer, Jesus intercedes for his followers, praying for their protection, understanding, holiness, and unity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:9-13; Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1-13; 18:1-8; 22:32, 39-46; 23:34, 46; John 17:1-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Prayers In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus prayed at critical events in his life: at his baptism (3:21), before calling the Twelve (6:12), at the Transfiguration (9:28-29), for Peter before his denial (22:32), and for his murderers from the cross (23:34). At times, Jesus withdrew from others so that he could pray alone (Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 5:16). He also taught the disciples to pray (Luke 11:1-4; see also Matt 6:5-13) and told parables about the need for persistent prayer (Luke 11:5-13; 1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"43":[{"id":1639,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Angel","title_en":"Angel","content_ro":"<h3>ANGEL<\/h3>\n<p>Messenger of God or supernatural being, either good or evil, with powers greater than humans possess.<\/p>\n<p>The first kind of angels mentioned in the Bible are cherubim (plural of “cherub,” a Hebrew word). They were celestial beings sent by God to guard the tree of life in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24). They were represented symbolically on the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:18-22), in the tabernacle (Ex 26:31) and temple (2 Chr 3:7), and seen by the prophet Ezekiel in a vision of the restored Jerusalem (Ez 41:18-20). Two angels, Gabriel and the chief, or archangel, Michael, are named in the Bible (Dn 8:16; 9:21; 10:13; Lk 1:19, 26; Jude 1:9; Rv 12:7-9).<\/p>\n\n<p>In the Bible, angels are spiritual beings who serve primarily as messengers. The English word “angel” comes directly from a Greek word for messenger. In Luke 9:52, Jesus sent “messengers” ahead of him. Usually the same word is translated “angel” and is understood to mean a spiritual messenger from God. In the OT also, one Hebrew word can refer either to a human messenger or to a spiritual being. It is not always immediately clear which is meant, especially since angels sometimes appeared in human form. In certain passages, “the angel of God” or a similar phrase may refer to God delivering his own message (see Gn 18:2-15).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appeared to many of God’s people in the Bible to announce good news (Jgs 13:3), warn of danger (Gn 19:15), guard from evil (Dn 3:28; 6:22), guide and protect (Ex 14:19), nourish (Gn 21:14-20; 1 Kgs 19:4-7), or instruct (Acts 7:38; Gal 3:19). When Christ came to earth as the Savior, angels heralded his birth (Lk 2:8-15), guided and warned his parents (Mt 2:13), strengthened him when he was tempted (Mt 4:11) and in his last distress (Lk 22:43-44 in some manuscripts), and observed his resurrection (Mt 28:1-6). Jesus spoke about the guardian angels of little children (Mt 18:10). Philip was guided by an angel (Acts 8:26). Apostles were rescued from prison by an angel (Acts 5:19; 12:7-11). In a frightening situation, the apostle Paul was encouraged by an angel (Acts 27:21-25).<\/p>\n\n<p>The physical appearance of angels in biblical encounters was often unusual enough to distinguish them from ordinary people. The angel who moved the stone from the entrance to Jesus’ tomb had an appearance like lightning and raiment white as snow (Mt 28:3). Many passages about angels are descriptions of dreams or visions. “Jacob’s ladder” with angels ascending and descending (Gn 28:12) is an example. In another dream an angel spoke to Jacob (Gn 31:11). An angel appeared to Cornelius in a vision (Acts 10:1-3). Major passages of this type include Isaiah 6 (the seraphim), much of the book of Ezekiel (the cherubim), and much of Daniel and Zechariah. In the NT, over a third of the references to angels are in the book of Revelation. In most cases there, the angelic beings are glorious or grotesque figures seen in visions and are not to be confused with human persons. The language describing such visions is appropriately mystical, or at least metaphorical and difficult to interpret.<\/p>\n<p>Angelology, or the doctrine of angels, is not a major theme in Christian theology in spite of the many references to angels in the Bible. Angels are included in descriptions of all that God created (Ps 148:2; Col 1:16). There are hints that they witnessed the creation of the world (Jb 38:7). No matter how close to God angels may be, they share with humankind the status of creatures. But as wholly spiritual creatures they are free from many human limitations, such as death (Lk 20:36). They do not marry (Mt 22:30), so they could be regarded as sexless. In all their appearances, angels in human form were taken to be men, never women or children. Their ability to communicate in human language and to affect human life in other ways is basic to their role in the Bible. Their power and awesome appearance (Mt 28:2-4) sometimes tempted people to fear or worship them, but the NT does not condone the worship of angels (Col 2:18; Rv 22:8-9). Though angels are stronger and wiser than human beings, their power and knowledge are also limited by God (Ps 103:20; Mt 24:36; 1 Pt 1:11-12; 2 Pt 2:11). <em>See<\/em> Cherub, Cherubim; Seraph, Seraphim; Demon; Demon-possession; Satan.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANGEL<\/h3>\n<p>Messenger of God or supernatural being, either good or evil, with powers greater than humans possess.<\/p>\n<p>The first kind of angels mentioned in the Bible are cherubim (plural of “cherub,” a Hebrew word). They were celestial beings sent by God to guard the tree of life in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24). They were represented symbolically on the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:18-22), in the tabernacle (Ex 26:31) and temple (2 Chr 3:7), and seen by the prophet Ezekiel in a vision of the restored Jerusalem (Ez 41:18-20). Two angels, Gabriel and the chief, or archangel, Michael, are named in the Bible (Dn 8:16; 9:21; 10:13; Lk 1:19, 26; Jude 1:9; Rv 12:7-9).<\/p>\n\n<p>In the Bible, angels are spiritual beings who serve primarily as messengers. The English word “angel” comes directly from a Greek word for messenger. In Luke 9:52, Jesus sent “messengers” ahead of him. Usually the same word is translated “angel” and is understood to mean a spiritual messenger from God. In the OT also, one Hebrew word can refer either to a human messenger or to a spiritual being. It is not always immediately clear which is meant, especially since angels sometimes appeared in human form. In certain passages, “the angel of God” or a similar phrase may refer to God delivering his own message (see Gn 18:2-15).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appeared to many of God’s people in the Bible to announce good news (Jgs 13:3), warn of danger (Gn 19:15), guard from evil (Dn 3:28; 6:22), guide and protect (Ex 14:19), nourish (Gn 21:14-20; 1 Kgs 19:4-7), or instruct (Acts 7:38; Gal 3:19). When Christ came to earth as the Savior, angels heralded his birth (Lk 2:8-15), guided and warned his parents (Mt 2:13), strengthened him when he was tempted (Mt 4:11) and in his last distress (Lk 22:43-44 in some manuscripts), and observed his resurrection (Mt 28:1-6). Jesus spoke about the guardian angels of little children (Mt 18:10). Philip was guided by an angel (Acts 8:26). Apostles were rescued from prison by an angel (Acts 5:19; 12:7-11). In a frightening situation, the apostle Paul was encouraged by an angel (Acts 27:21-25).<\/p>\n\n<p>The physical appearance of angels in biblical encounters was often unusual enough to distinguish them from ordinary people. The angel who moved the stone from the entrance to Jesus’ tomb had an appearance like lightning and raiment white as snow (Mt 28:3). Many passages about angels are descriptions of dreams or visions. “Jacob’s ladder” with angels ascending and descending (Gn 28:12) is an example. In another dream an angel spoke to Jacob (Gn 31:11). An angel appeared to Cornelius in a vision (Acts 10:1-3). Major passages of this type include Isaiah 6 (the seraphim), much of the book of Ezekiel (the cherubim), and much of Daniel and Zechariah. In the NT, over a third of the references to angels are in the book of Revelation. In most cases there, the angelic beings are glorious or grotesque figures seen in visions and are not to be confused with human persons. The language describing such visions is appropriately mystical, or at least metaphorical and difficult to interpret.<\/p>\n<p>Angelology, or the doctrine of angels, is not a major theme in Christian theology in spite of the many references to angels in the Bible. Angels are included in descriptions of all that God created (Ps 148:2; Col 1:16). There are hints that they witnessed the creation of the world (Jb 38:7). No matter how close to God angels may be, they share with humankind the status of creatures. But as wholly spiritual creatures they are free from many human limitations, such as death (Lk 20:36). They do not marry (Mt 22:30), so they could be regarded as sexless. In all their appearances, angels in human form were taken to be men, never women or children. Their ability to communicate in human language and to affect human life in other ways is basic to their role in the Bible. Their power and awesome appearance (Mt 28:2-4) sometimes tempted people to fear or worship them, but the NT does not condone the worship of angels (Col 2:18; Rv 22:8-9). Though angels are stronger and wiser than human beings, their power and knowledge are also limited by God (Ps 103:20; Mt 24:36; 1 Pt 1:11-12; 2 Pt 2:11). <em>See<\/em> Cherub, Cherubim; Seraph, Seraphim; Demon; Demon-possession; Satan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANGEL Messenger of God or supernatural being, either good or evil, with powers greater than humans possess. The first kind of angels mentioned in the Bible are cherubim (plural of “cherub,” a Hebrew word). They were celestial beings sent by God to guard the tree of life in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24). They were represented symbolically on the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:18-22), in the tabernacle (Ex 26:31) and temple (2 Chr 3:7), and seen by the prophet Ezekiel in a vision of the restored Jer...","summary_en":"ANGEL Messenger of God or supernatural being, either good or evil, with powers greater than humans possess. The first kind of angels mentioned in the Bible are cherubim (plural of “cherub,” a Hebrew word). They were celestial beings sent by God to guard the tree of life in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24). They were represented symbolically on the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:18-22), in the tabernacle (Ex 26:31) and temple (2 Chr 3:7), and seen by the prophet Ezekiel in a vision of the restored Jer...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40211,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"The Bloody-Sweat Passage","title_en":"The Bloody-Sweat Passage","content_ro":"<h3>The Bloody-Sweat Passage<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>This is the name for Luke 22:43-44, which speaks of Jesus sweating, as it were, drops of blood. But the genuiness of this passage is doubted—at least, as to Lucan authorship. Several important manuscripts do not include the passage: P69, P75, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Borgianus, and Codex Washingtonianus—manuscripts dating from the second to the fifth century. Other signs of its doubtfulness appear in manuscripts marking the passage with obeli (symbols), including 0171 (dated around 300) or crossing out the passage (as was done by the first corrector of Codex Sinaiticus). Writing in the fourth century, Epiphanius (Ancoratus 31.4-5) indicated that the verses were found in some “uncorrected copies” ofLuke. But other early church fathers (Justin, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Dionysius, Eusebius) acknowledged this portion as part of Luke’s Gospel.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The debate about the genuiness of this passage has focused on what view one takes concerning whether or not Jesus needed to have been strengthened by angels during his trial in the Garden of Gethsemane. Some have said that the passage was excised because certain Christians thought that the account of Jesus overwhelmed with human weakness was incompatible with his deity. But it is more likely that the passage was an early (second century) interpolation, added from an oral tradition concerning the life of Jesus. Its transposition to Matthew 26 in some manuscripts and lectionaries indicates that it was a free-floating passage that could be interjected into any of the Passion narratives.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the textual evidence against the passage, most English versions have kept it in the text for the sake of tradition. Therefore, many Christians consider this detail about Jesus’ Passion to be authentic. However, it is often interpreted incorrectly to say that Jesus was in such agony that he was sweating blood (technically called hemohydrosis or hematidrosis); that is why the passage is often called “the bloody-sweat” text. But the text says that he was sweating so profusely that it looked like blood dripping from a wound, not that his sweat became dripping blood.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Bloody-Sweat Passage<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>This is the name for Luke 22:43-44, which speaks of Jesus sweating, as it were, drops of blood. But the genuiness of this passage is doubted—at least, as to Lucan authorship. Several important manuscripts do not include the passage: P69, P75, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Borgianus, and Codex Washingtonianus—manuscripts dating from the second to the fifth century. Other signs of its doubtfulness appear in manuscripts marking the passage with obeli (symbols), including 0171 (dated around 300) or crossing out the passage (as was done by the first corrector of Codex Sinaiticus). Writing in the fourth century, Epiphanius (Ancoratus 31.4-5) indicated that the verses were found in some “uncorrected copies” ofLuke. But other early church fathers (Justin, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Dionysius, Eusebius) acknowledged this portion as part of Luke’s Gospel.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The debate about the genuiness of this passage has focused on what view one takes concerning whether or not Jesus needed to have been strengthened by angels during his trial in the Garden of Gethsemane. Some have said that the passage was excised because certain Christians thought that the account of Jesus overwhelmed with human weakness was incompatible with his deity. But it is more likely that the passage was an early (second century) interpolation, added from an oral tradition concerning the life of Jesus. Its transposition to Matthew 26 in some manuscripts and lectionaries indicates that it was a free-floating passage that could be interjected into any of the Passion narratives.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the textual evidence against the passage, most English versions have kept it in the text for the sake of tradition. Therefore, many Christians consider this detail about Jesus’ Passion to be authentic. However, it is often interpreted incorrectly to say that Jesus was in such agony that he was sweating blood (technically called hemohydrosis or hematidrosis); that is why the passage is often called “the bloody-sweat” text. But the text says that he was sweating so profusely that it looked like blood dripping from a wound, not that his sweat became dripping blood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Bloody-Sweat Passage This is the name for Luke 22:43-44, which speaks of Jesus sweating, as it were, drops of blood. But the genuiness of this passage is doubted—at least, as to Lucan authorship. Several important manuscripts do not include the passage: P69, P75, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Borgianus, and Codex Washingtonianus—manuscripts dating from the second to the fifth century. Other signs of its doubtfulness appear in manuscripts marking the passage with obeli (symbols)...","summary_en":"The Bloody-Sweat Passage This is the name for Luke 22:43-44, which speaks of Jesus sweating, as it were, drops of blood. But the genuiness of this passage is doubted—at least, as to Lucan authorship. Several important manuscripts do not include the passage: P69, P75, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Borgianus, and Codex Washingtonianus—manuscripts dating from the second to the fifth century. Other signs of its doubtfulness appear in manuscripts marking the passage with obeli (symbols)...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56222,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:43","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:43<\/strong> <em>an angel from heaven:<\/em> Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:43<\/strong> <em>an angel from heaven:<\/em> Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:43 an angel from heaven: Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).","summary_en":"22:43 an angel from heaven: Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83848,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:43","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:43<\/strong> <em>an angel from heaven:<\/em> Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:43<\/strong> <em>an angel from heaven:<\/em> Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:43 an angel from heaven: Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).","summary_en":"22:43 an angel from heaven: Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111474,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:43","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:43<\/strong> <em>an angel from heaven:<\/em> Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:43<\/strong> <em>an angel from heaven:<\/em> Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:43 an angel from heaven: Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).","summary_en":"22:43 an angel from heaven: Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139100,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:43","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:43<\/strong> <em>an angel from heaven:<\/em> Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:43<\/strong> <em>an angel from heaven:<\/em> Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:43 an angel from heaven: Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).","summary_en":"22:43 an angel from heaven: Angels often help and encourage human beings (see Heb 1:14; cp. 1 Kgs 19:5-8; Ps 91:11-12; Dan 3:28; 10:16-19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"44":[{"id":5314,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sweat*, Bloody","title_en":"Sweat*, Bloody","content_ro":"<h3>BLOODY SWEAT*<\/h3>\n<p>Rare medical condition called hemohydrosis, thought to result from hemorrhage of small blood vessels into the sweat glands. It occurs only in extreme emotional stress and is of biblical interest because of the reference to Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane before his betrayal: “And being in agony He was praying very fervently; and His sweat became like drops of blood, falling down upon the ground” (Lk 22:44, <span>nasb<\/span>). Although some translations make it appear that Jesus actually sweat blood, the Greek text is clearly making a comparison. That is, sweat poured off of Jesus “as though he were bleeding,” an apt analogy for Luke, a physician, to make.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLOODY SWEAT*<\/h3>\n<p>Rare medical condition called hemohydrosis, thought to result from hemorrhage of small blood vessels into the sweat glands. It occurs only in extreme emotional stress and is of biblical interest because of the reference to Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane before his betrayal: “And being in agony He was praying very fervently; and His sweat became like drops of blood, falling down upon the ground” (Lk 22:44, <span>nasb<\/span>). Although some translations make it appear that Jesus actually sweat blood, the Greek text is clearly making a comparison. That is, sweat poured off of Jesus “as though he were bleeding,” an apt analogy for Luke, a physician, to make.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLOODY SWEAT* Rare medical condition called hemohydrosis, thought to result from hemorrhage of small blood vessels into the sweat glands. It occurs only in extreme emotional stress and is of biblical interest because of the reference to Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane before his betrayal: “And being in agony He was praying very fervently; and His sweat became like drops of blood, falling down upon the ground” (Lk 22:44, nasb). Although some translations make it appear that Jesus actually sw...","summary_en":"BLOODY SWEAT* Rare medical condition called hemohydrosis, thought to result from hemorrhage of small blood vessels into the sweat glands. It occurs only in extreme emotional stress and is of biblical interest because of the reference to Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane before his betrayal: “And being in agony He was praying very fervently; and His sweat became like drops of blood, falling down upon the ground” (Lk 22:44, nasb). Although some translations make it appear that Jesus actually sw...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56223,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:44","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:44","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:44<\/strong> <em>his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood:<\/em> The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his <em>agony<\/em> he sweated profusely.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:44<\/strong> <em>his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood:<\/em> The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his <em>agony<\/em> he sweated profusely.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:44 his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood: The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his agony he sweated profusely.","summary_en":"22:44 his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood: The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his agony he sweated profusely.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83849,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:44","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:44","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:44<\/strong> <em>his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood:<\/em> The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his <em>agony<\/em> he sweated profusely.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:44<\/strong> <em>his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood:<\/em> The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his <em>agony<\/em> he sweated profusely.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:44 his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood: The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his agony he sweated profusely.","summary_en":"22:44 his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood: The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his agony he sweated profusely.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111475,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:44","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:44","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:44<\/strong> <em>his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood:<\/em> The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his <em>agony<\/em> he sweated profusely.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:44<\/strong> <em>his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood:<\/em> The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his <em>agony<\/em> he sweated profusely.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:44 his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood: The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his agony he sweated profusely.","summary_en":"22:44 his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood: The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his agony he sweated profusely.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139101,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:44","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:44","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:44<\/strong> <em>his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood:<\/em> The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his <em>agony<\/em> he sweated profusely.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:44<\/strong> <em>his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood:<\/em> The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his <em>agony<\/em> he sweated profusely.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:44 his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood: The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his agony he sweated profusely.","summary_en":"22:44 his sweat fell to the ground like great drops of blood: The text does not say that Jesus sweated blood, as is often supposed, but that his sweat fell like blood pouring to the ground, which probably means that in his agony he sweated profusely.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"45":[{"id":56224,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:45","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:45","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against <em>temptation<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against <em>temptation<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:45-46 Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against temptation.","summary_en":"22:45-46 Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against temptation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83850,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:45","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:45","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against <em>temptation<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against <em>temptation<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:45-46 Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against temptation.","summary_en":"22:45-46 Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against temptation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111476,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:45","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:45","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against <em>temptation<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against <em>temptation<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:45-46 Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against temptation.","summary_en":"22:45-46 Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against temptation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139102,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:45","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:45","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against <em>temptation<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:45-46<\/strong> Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against <em>temptation<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:45-46 Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against temptation.","summary_en":"22:45-46 Jesus’ agonized prayer contrasted with the disciples’ failure to be vigilant against temptation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"47":[{"id":42286,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69912,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97538,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125164,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56225,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:47","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:47","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:47<\/strong> A <em>kiss<\/em> was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:47<\/strong> A <em>kiss<\/em> was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:47 A kiss was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.","summary_en":"22:47 A kiss was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83851,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:47","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:47","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:47<\/strong> A <em>kiss<\/em> was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:47<\/strong> A <em>kiss<\/em> was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:47 A kiss was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.","summary_en":"22:47 A kiss was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111477,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:47","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:47","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:47<\/strong> A <em>kiss<\/em> was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:47<\/strong> A <em>kiss<\/em> was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:47 A kiss was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.","summary_en":"22:47 A kiss was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139103,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:47","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:47","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:47<\/strong> A <em>kiss<\/em> was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:47<\/strong> A <em>kiss<\/em> was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:47 A kiss was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.","summary_en":"22:47 A kiss was a common greeting between friends. Judas’s kiss highlighted his treachery.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"50":[{"id":24115,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Malchus","title_en":"Malchus","content_ro":"<h3>MALCHUS<\/h3>\n<p>Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MALCHUS<\/h3>\n<p>Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MALCHUS Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.","summary_en":"MALCHUS Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34496,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Last Sayings of Jesus*, Seven","title_en":"Last Sayings of Jesus*, Seven","content_ro":"<h3>SEVEN LAST SAYINGS OF JESUS*<\/h3>\n<p>Recorded words of Jesus between the time he was crucified and the time he died. These seven sentences (quoted below from the <span>kjv<\/span>) are not found in any one Gospel. Instead, the first two and the seventh occur only in Luke; the third, fifth, and sixth, only in John; and the fourth, in both Matthew and Mark. The order is traditional; because no Gospel records them all, it is uncertain in which order they really came. Also unknown is whether Jesus said other things from the cross or whether the seven sayings are summaries of longer statements. But considering the trauma of crucifixion, it would not be surprising if this were all he said.<\/p>\n<p>1. “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” (Lk 23:34).<\/p>\n<p>This is the only one of the seven last words whose genuineness is questioned, for several of the best Greek manuscripts do not contain it. Even if an element of doubt exists (the evidence is fairly evenly balanced), it certainly fits what is known of Jesus and his love, whether or not Luke originally recorded it. Just a few verses before, Jesus showed more concern for others than for himself (Lk 19:41; 22:50-51; 23:28). Jesus lived his own teaching and prayed for those who were torturing him (Lk 6:27-28)—no greater impulse for mankind to go and do likewise could be given. Certainly the soldiers and Jewish leaders were not totally unaware of what they were doing (cf. Acts 3:17), but in that they did not know the real import of their action, they were ignorant. For Christians, the request “Father, forgive” is more important than the reason, as Stephen recognized when he paraphrased it at his own martyrdom (Acts 7:60). In the end, forgiveness demands no reason; it is grace.<\/p>\n<p>2. “Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Lk 23:43).<\/p>\n<p>Luke does not record this statement to teach about the abode of the dead but to express the response of the Lord to faith. One criminal quite understandably joins with the jeering crowd and gets only silence (Lk 23:40), but the other quite remarkably recognizes not only the innocence of Jesus but also that the cross was only a prelude to the kingdom (vv 40-42). Jesus promised the man that he would be with him in paradise. Here again is grace, asked for and received.<\/p>\n<p>3. “Woman, behold thy son! . . . Behold thy mother!” (Jn 19:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>John pictures Jesus as fully in control of the situation. At this point that control is apparent, as he calmly cares for his mother instead of focusing on his own suffering. Mary was also suffering as the “sword” pierced her heart (Lk 2:35). Jesus, now much more her Lord than her son, remembers his natural as well as his spiritual relationships. It is not known why Jesus’ brothers were not around to care for Mary, or why they missed the Passover festival. It also is unknown why the beloved disciple was chosen, but perhaps the choice fell on him because he was there at Calvary and he was trustworthy.<\/p>\n<p>4. “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Mt 27:46; Mk 15:34).<\/p>\n<p>It is now hours later than the first three words, deep in the darkness that covered Calvary for the last three hours. Suddenly Jesus cried out the first words of Psalm 22. Mark recorded them in Jesus’ native language, Aramaic, while Matthew changed them to Hebrew. The meaning of the cry (called the cry of dereliction) has been variously explained as an expression of human feeling, a statement of disappointment that God did not deliver him, an expression of separation from God because he was bearing sin, or a citation of the whole psalm with its triumphal ending being intended. Although the full depth of this cry is a mystery known only to Jesus and his Father, it is probable that, because the psalm is a cry to God for vindication, Jesus is here asking for that. He cries to God to show that he is truly God’s chosen one. The petititon is answered in that God raised his Son from the dead three days later.<\/p>\n<p>5. “I thirst” (Jn 19:28).<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the crucifixion, Jesus was offered a drugged wine as a soporific to deaden the pain of crucifixion. He refused it (Mt 27:34; Mk 15:23). Now, severely dehydrated, Jesus accepts the soldiers’ sour wine (Jn 19:29), which would sharpen his senses for his final cry. He needed it, for he had been hanging there six hours. Perhaps at no place in the life of Jesus do we see his full humanity quite so clearly as here. John saw this action as a fulfillment of Psalm 22:15 (and perhaps Ps 69:21).<\/p>\n<p>6. “It is finished” (Jn 19:30).<\/p>\n<p>John completes the crucifixion account with this simple statement (a single word in Greek). The sentence naturally reveals relief and satisfaction that the pain and agony are over, that death will soon release him, but John’s context gives the word a deeper meaning. According to John, Jesus was in control of the whole crucifixion. He said that no one could take his life from him—he would lay it down of his own accord (Jn 10:18; 19:10-11). So here, knowing that he had totally completed the will of the Father, he voluntarily laid his life down. What is finished, then, is not simply his dying, nor his life per se, nor the work of redemption, but the total reason for his being in the world. The last act of obedience has been accomplished; the last scripture has been fulfilled. Jesus proclaims his life “finished” and exits from the stage until the resurrection begins a new act.<\/p>\n<p>7. “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Lk 23:46).<\/p>\n<p>Luke has a different picture of the end than John and the other Evangelists. Matthew and Mark report only “a great cry” after the cry of dereliction, ending on a dark note. John ends with the completed work. Luke, who reports no feeling of forsakenness, ends by telling us the great cry was a quotation of Psalm 31:5 (cf. Stephen in Acts 7:59). The quotation is prefaced by “Father,” the familiar <em>Abba,<\/em> a form of address to God characteristic of Jesus. His relationship to God is unbroken to the end. Jesus is not leaping into the dark or fighting against the unknown but placing himself in death into the hands of the same Father he had served in life.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crucifixion; Eli, Eli, Lema Sabachthani.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SEVEN LAST SAYINGS OF JESUS*<\/h3>\n<p>Recorded words of Jesus between the time he was crucified and the time he died. These seven sentences (quoted below from the <span>kjv<\/span>) are not found in any one Gospel. Instead, the first two and the seventh occur only in Luke; the third, fifth, and sixth, only in John; and the fourth, in both Matthew and Mark. The order is traditional; because no Gospel records them all, it is uncertain in which order they really came. Also unknown is whether Jesus said other things from the cross or whether the seven sayings are summaries of longer statements. But considering the trauma of crucifixion, it would not be surprising if this were all he said.<\/p>\n<p>1. “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” (Lk 23:34).<\/p>\n<p>This is the only one of the seven last words whose genuineness is questioned, for several of the best Greek manuscripts do not contain it. Even if an element of doubt exists (the evidence is fairly evenly balanced), it certainly fits what is known of Jesus and his love, whether or not Luke originally recorded it. Just a few verses before, Jesus showed more concern for others than for himself (Lk 19:41; 22:50-51; 23:28). Jesus lived his own teaching and prayed for those who were torturing him (Lk 6:27-28)—no greater impulse for mankind to go and do likewise could be given. Certainly the soldiers and Jewish leaders were not totally unaware of what they were doing (cf. Acts 3:17), but in that they did not know the real import of their action, they were ignorant. For Christians, the request “Father, forgive” is more important than the reason, as Stephen recognized when he paraphrased it at his own martyrdom (Acts 7:60). In the end, forgiveness demands no reason; it is grace.<\/p>\n<p>2. “Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Lk 23:43).<\/p>\n<p>Luke does not record this statement to teach about the abode of the dead but to express the response of the Lord to faith. One criminal quite understandably joins with the jeering crowd and gets only silence (Lk 23:40), but the other quite remarkably recognizes not only the innocence of Jesus but also that the cross was only a prelude to the kingdom (vv 40-42). Jesus promised the man that he would be with him in paradise. Here again is grace, asked for and received.<\/p>\n<p>3. “Woman, behold thy son! . . . Behold thy mother!” (Jn 19:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>John pictures Jesus as fully in control of the situation. At this point that control is apparent, as he calmly cares for his mother instead of focusing on his own suffering. Mary was also suffering as the “sword” pierced her heart (Lk 2:35). Jesus, now much more her Lord than her son, remembers his natural as well as his spiritual relationships. It is not known why Jesus’ brothers were not around to care for Mary, or why they missed the Passover festival. It also is unknown why the beloved disciple was chosen, but perhaps the choice fell on him because he was there at Calvary and he was trustworthy.<\/p>\n<p>4. “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Mt 27:46; Mk 15:34).<\/p>\n<p>It is now hours later than the first three words, deep in the darkness that covered Calvary for the last three hours. Suddenly Jesus cried out the first words of Psalm 22. Mark recorded them in Jesus’ native language, Aramaic, while Matthew changed them to Hebrew. The meaning of the cry (called the cry of dereliction) has been variously explained as an expression of human feeling, a statement of disappointment that God did not deliver him, an expression of separation from God because he was bearing sin, or a citation of the whole psalm with its triumphal ending being intended. Although the full depth of this cry is a mystery known only to Jesus and his Father, it is probable that, because the psalm is a cry to God for vindication, Jesus is here asking for that. He cries to God to show that he is truly God’s chosen one. The petititon is answered in that God raised his Son from the dead three days later.<\/p>\n<p>5. “I thirst” (Jn 19:28).<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the crucifixion, Jesus was offered a drugged wine as a soporific to deaden the pain of crucifixion. He refused it (Mt 27:34; Mk 15:23). Now, severely dehydrated, Jesus accepts the soldiers’ sour wine (Jn 19:29), which would sharpen his senses for his final cry. He needed it, for he had been hanging there six hours. Perhaps at no place in the life of Jesus do we see his full humanity quite so clearly as here. John saw this action as a fulfillment of Psalm 22:15 (and perhaps Ps 69:21).<\/p>\n<p>6. “It is finished” (Jn 19:30).<\/p>\n<p>John completes the crucifixion account with this simple statement (a single word in Greek). The sentence naturally reveals relief and satisfaction that the pain and agony are over, that death will soon release him, but John’s context gives the word a deeper meaning. According to John, Jesus was in control of the whole crucifixion. He said that no one could take his life from him—he would lay it down of his own accord (Jn 10:18; 19:10-11). So here, knowing that he had totally completed the will of the Father, he voluntarily laid his life down. What is finished, then, is not simply his dying, nor his life per se, nor the work of redemption, but the total reason for his being in the world. The last act of obedience has been accomplished; the last scripture has been fulfilled. Jesus proclaims his life “finished” and exits from the stage until the resurrection begins a new act.<\/p>\n<p>7. “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Lk 23:46).<\/p>\n<p>Luke has a different picture of the end than John and the other Evangelists. Matthew and Mark report only “a great cry” after the cry of dereliction, ending on a dark note. John ends with the completed work. Luke, who reports no feeling of forsakenness, ends by telling us the great cry was a quotation of Psalm 31:5 (cf. Stephen in Acts 7:59). The quotation is prefaced by “Father,” the familiar <em>Abba,<\/em> a form of address to God characteristic of Jesus. His relationship to God is unbroken to the end. Jesus is not leaping into the dark or fighting against the unknown but placing himself in death into the hands of the same Father he had served in life.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crucifixion; Eli, Eli, Lema Sabachthani.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SEVEN LAST SAYINGS OF JESUS* Recorded words of Jesus between the time he was crucified and the time he died. These seven sentences (quoted below from the kjv) are not found in any one Gospel. Instead, the first two and the seventh occur only in Luke; the third, fifth, and sixth, only in John; and the fourth, in both Matthew and Mark. The order is traditional; because no Gospel records them all, it is uncertain in which order they really came. Also unknown is whether Jesus said other things fr...","summary_en":"SEVEN LAST SAYINGS OF JESUS* Recorded words of Jesus between the time he was crucified and the time he died. These seven sentences (quoted below from the kjv) are not found in any one Gospel. Instead, the first two and the seventh occur only in Luke; the third, fifth, and sixth, only in John; and the fourth, in both Matthew and Mark. The order is traditional; because no Gospel records them all, it is uncertain in which order they really came. Also unknown is whether Jesus said other things fr...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"51":[{"id":56226,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:51","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:51<\/strong> <em>he touched the man’s ear and healed him:<\/em> John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 <em>\/\/<\/em> Mark 14:50).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:51<\/strong> <em>he touched the man’s ear and healed him:<\/em> John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 <em>\/\/<\/em> Mark 14:50).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:51 he touched the man’s ear and healed him: John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 \/\/ Mark 14:50).","summary_en":"22:51 he touched the man’s ear and healed him: John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 \/\/ Mark 14:50).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83852,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:51","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:51<\/strong> <em>he touched the man’s ear and healed him:<\/em> John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 <em>\/\/<\/em> Mark 14:50).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:51<\/strong> <em>he touched the man’s ear and healed him:<\/em> John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 <em>\/\/<\/em> Mark 14:50).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:51 he touched the man’s ear and healed him: John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 \/\/ Mark 14:50).","summary_en":"22:51 he touched the man’s ear and healed him: John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 \/\/ Mark 14:50).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111478,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:51","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:51<\/strong> <em>he touched the man’s ear and healed him:<\/em> John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 <em>\/\/<\/em> Mark 14:50).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:51<\/strong> <em>he touched the man’s ear and healed him:<\/em> John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 <em>\/\/<\/em> Mark 14:50).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:51 he touched the man’s ear and healed him: John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 \/\/ Mark 14:50).","summary_en":"22:51 he touched the man’s ear and healed him: John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 \/\/ Mark 14:50).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139104,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:51","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:51<\/strong> <em>he touched the man’s ear and healed him:<\/em> John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 <em>\/\/<\/em> Mark 14:50).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:51<\/strong> <em>he touched the man’s ear and healed him:<\/em> John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 <em>\/\/<\/em> Mark 14:50).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:51 he touched the man’s ear and healed him: John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 \/\/ Mark 14:50).","summary_en":"22:51 he touched the man’s ear and healed him: John tells us that the man’s name was Malchus and that Peter was the one who cut off his ear (John 18:10). Peter probably thought that he was precipitating the final war and that the heavenly host was about to appear and destroy the Romans. When Jesus refused to fight, the terror-stricken disciples fled (Matt 26:56 \/\/ Mark 14:50).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"52":[{"id":56227,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:52","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:52","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:52<\/strong> The Greek word translated <em>revolutionary<\/em> normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:52<\/strong> The Greek word translated <em>revolutionary<\/em> normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:52 The Greek word translated revolutionary normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.","summary_en":"22:52 The Greek word translated revolutionary normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83853,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:52","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:52","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:52<\/strong> The Greek word translated <em>revolutionary<\/em> normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:52<\/strong> The Greek word translated <em>revolutionary<\/em> normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:52 The Greek word translated revolutionary normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.","summary_en":"22:52 The Greek word translated revolutionary normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111479,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:52","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:52","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:52<\/strong> The Greek word translated <em>revolutionary<\/em> normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:52<\/strong> The Greek word translated <em>revolutionary<\/em> normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:52 The Greek word translated revolutionary normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.","summary_en":"22:52 The Greek word translated revolutionary normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139105,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:52","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:52","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:52<\/strong> The Greek word translated <em>revolutionary<\/em> normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:52<\/strong> The Greek word translated <em>revolutionary<\/em> normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:52 The Greek word translated revolutionary normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.","summary_en":"22:52 The Greek word translated revolutionary normally means “thief,” but the Romans used this term for violent revolutionaries who opposed Roman authority (such as Barabbas, 23:18-19). To patriotic Jews, they were freedom fighters; to the Romans, they were common thugs.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"53":[{"id":8671,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Darkness","title_en":"Darkness","content_ro":"<h3>DARKNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense.<\/p>\n<p>When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense darkness that could be “felt” (Ex 10:21-23). That darkness lasted three days and was selective; wherever Egyptians were, it was dark, but where the Israelites were, there was light. The Israelites left Egypt accompanied by a cloud that separated them from their enemy, evidently giving light to the Israelites but making darkness for the Egyptians (Ex 14:20). The Bible notes that thieves or adulterers are likely to do their evil deeds in the dark or at night (Jb 24:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “darkness” is used twice in its literal sense. At the crucifixion of Jesus, for a three-hour period from noon to three o’clock, there was not light (Mt 27:45; Mk 15:33; Lk 23:44). The other reference is to Christ’s second coming, when “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light” (Mt 24:29, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Several biblical passages speak of a darkness surrounding God, evidently moving from a literal sense of absence of light to a more profound meaning. God spoke to Moses on Mt Sinai in a dense, black cloud (Ex 20:21; Dt 4:11) or from the darkness (Dt 5:23). Darkness is pictured as a shelter or cloak around God (2 Sm 22:12; Pss 18:11; 97:2). God sets a boundary for light and darkness (Jb 26:10), brings darkness (Pss 104:20; 105:28), and creates light and darkness (Is 45:7). God dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12; 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sm 22:10; Ps 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>Most figurative references to darkness appear in poetic material, such as Job, Psalms, and Isaiah. Generally, such darkness depicts ignorance about God’s will. Knowledge of God is “light”; hence, lack of such knowledge is “darkness” (Jb 12:24-25; Mt 4:16; Jn 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11).<\/p>\n<p>Job spoke of darkness as equivalent to nothingness (Jb 3:4-6). In other references darkness stands for death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Jb 10:21-22; 15:24; 17:12-13; 18:18; Eccl 6:4; 11:8).<\/p>\n<p>Darkness frequently stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gn 15:12; Jb 5:14; 12:25; 15:22, 30; 19:8; 22:11; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Is 5:30). Moral depravity is sometimes described as darkness (Prv 2:13; 4:19; Is 5:20; 60:2). In the NT darkness is generally a metaphor of moral depravity and spiritual ignorance (Mt 4:16; 6:23; Lk 1:79; 11:35; 22:53; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of OT prophets was the Day of the Lord, often associated with darkness (Ez 32:8; Jl 2:2, 31; Am 5:18, 20; Zep 1:15). The NT also links darkness with judgment in connection with Christ’s second coming (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pt 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13). Those who come to know God are said to come out of darkness (Is 9:2; 29:18; 42:7); darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Jb 34:22; Ps 139:11-12; Is 29:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Light.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DARKNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense.<\/p>\n<p>When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense darkness that could be “felt” (Ex 10:21-23). That darkness lasted three days and was selective; wherever Egyptians were, it was dark, but where the Israelites were, there was light. The Israelites left Egypt accompanied by a cloud that separated them from their enemy, evidently giving light to the Israelites but making darkness for the Egyptians (Ex 14:20). The Bible notes that thieves or adulterers are likely to do their evil deeds in the dark or at night (Jb 24:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “darkness” is used twice in its literal sense. At the crucifixion of Jesus, for a three-hour period from noon to three o’clock, there was not light (Mt 27:45; Mk 15:33; Lk 23:44). The other reference is to Christ’s second coming, when “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light” (Mt 24:29, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Several biblical passages speak of a darkness surrounding God, evidently moving from a literal sense of absence of light to a more profound meaning. God spoke to Moses on Mt Sinai in a dense, black cloud (Ex 20:21; Dt 4:11) or from the darkness (Dt 5:23). Darkness is pictured as a shelter or cloak around God (2 Sm 22:12; Pss 18:11; 97:2). God sets a boundary for light and darkness (Jb 26:10), brings darkness (Pss 104:20; 105:28), and creates light and darkness (Is 45:7). God dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12; 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sm 22:10; Ps 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>Most figurative references to darkness appear in poetic material, such as Job, Psalms, and Isaiah. Generally, such darkness depicts ignorance about God’s will. Knowledge of God is “light”; hence, lack of such knowledge is “darkness” (Jb 12:24-25; Mt 4:16; Jn 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11).<\/p>\n<p>Job spoke of darkness as equivalent to nothingness (Jb 3:4-6). In other references darkness stands for death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Jb 10:21-22; 15:24; 17:12-13; 18:18; Eccl 6:4; 11:8).<\/p>\n<p>Darkness frequently stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gn 15:12; Jb 5:14; 12:25; 15:22, 30; 19:8; 22:11; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Is 5:30). Moral depravity is sometimes described as darkness (Prv 2:13; 4:19; Is 5:20; 60:2). In the NT darkness is generally a metaphor of moral depravity and spiritual ignorance (Mt 4:16; 6:23; Lk 1:79; 11:35; 22:53; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of OT prophets was the Day of the Lord, often associated with darkness (Ez 32:8; Jl 2:2, 31; Am 5:18, 20; Zep 1:15). The NT also links darkness with judgment in connection with Christ’s second coming (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pt 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13). Those who come to know God are said to come out of darkness (Is 9:2; 29:18; 42:7); darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Jb 34:22; Ps 139:11-12; Is 29:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Light.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DARKNESS Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense. When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense ...","summary_en":"DARKNESS Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense. When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31018,"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}],"54":[{"id":42131,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69757,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97383,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125009,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19564,"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":56228,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:54","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:54","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:54<\/strong> <em>The high priest’s home<\/em> might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:54<\/strong> <em>The high priest’s home<\/em> might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:54 The high priest’s home might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).","summary_en":"22:54 The high priest’s home might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83854,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:54","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:54","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:54<\/strong> <em>The high priest’s home<\/em> might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:54<\/strong> <em>The high priest’s home<\/em> might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:54 The high priest’s home might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).","summary_en":"22:54 The high priest’s home might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111480,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:54","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:54","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:54<\/strong> <em>The high priest’s home<\/em> might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:54<\/strong> <em>The high priest’s home<\/em> might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:54 The high priest’s home might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).","summary_en":"22:54 The high priest’s home might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139106,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:54","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:54","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:54<\/strong> <em>The high priest’s home<\/em> might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:54<\/strong> <em>The high priest’s home<\/em> might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:54 The high priest’s home might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).","summary_en":"22:54 The high priest’s home might have been the home of Caiaphas, the current high priest, or Annas, his father-in-law and a previous high priest (see study note on 3:2; John 18:12-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"55":[{"id":42175,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69801,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97427,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125053,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"59":[{"id":13186,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Galilee","title_en":"Galilee","content_ro":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","summary_en":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56229,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:59","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:59","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:59<\/strong> <em>because he is a Galilean:<\/em> Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:59<\/strong> <em>because he is a Galilean:<\/em> Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:59 because he is a Galilean: Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).","summary_en":"22:59 because he is a Galilean: Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83855,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:59","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:59","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:59<\/strong> <em>because he is a Galilean:<\/em> Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:59<\/strong> <em>because he is a Galilean:<\/em> Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:59 because he is a Galilean: Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).","summary_en":"22:59 because he is a Galilean: Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111481,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:59","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:59","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:59<\/strong> <em>because he is a Galilean:<\/em> Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:59<\/strong> <em>because he is a Galilean:<\/em> Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:59 because he is a Galilean: Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).","summary_en":"22:59 because he is a Galilean: Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139107,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:59","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:59","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:59<\/strong> <em>because he is a Galilean:<\/em> Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:59<\/strong> <em>because he is a Galilean:<\/em> Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:59 because he is a Galilean: Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).","summary_en":"22:59 because he is a Galilean: Peter’s Galilean accent gave him away (cp. Judg 12:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"61":[{"id":56230,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:61","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:61","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:61<\/strong> <em>the Lord turned and looked at Peter:<\/em> Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:61<\/strong> <em>the Lord turned and looked at Peter:<\/em> Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:61 the Lord turned and looked at Peter: Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).","summary_en":"22:61 the Lord turned and looked at Peter: Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83856,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:61","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:61","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:61<\/strong> <em>the Lord turned and looked at Peter:<\/em> Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:61<\/strong> <em>the Lord turned and looked at Peter:<\/em> Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:61 the Lord turned and looked at Peter: Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).","summary_en":"22:61 the Lord turned and looked at Peter: Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111482,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:61","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:61","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:61<\/strong> <em>the Lord turned and looked at Peter:<\/em> Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:61<\/strong> <em>the Lord turned and looked at Peter:<\/em> Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:61 the Lord turned and looked at Peter: Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).","summary_en":"22:61 the Lord turned and looked at Peter: Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139108,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:61","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:61","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:61<\/strong> <em>the Lord turned and looked at Peter:<\/em> Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:61<\/strong> <em>the Lord turned and looked at Peter:<\/em> Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:61 the Lord turned and looked at Peter: Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).","summary_en":"22:61 the Lord turned and looked at Peter: Jesus was in the house being questioned and must have looked through a window or vestibule. When their eyes met and the rooster crowed, Peter remembered Jesus’ prediction (22:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"63":[{"id":28942,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Passion*","title_en":"Passion*","content_ro":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","summary_en":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56231,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:63","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:63<\/strong> <em>mocking and beating him:<\/em> See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:63<\/strong> <em>mocking and beating him:<\/em> See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:63 mocking and beating him: See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.","summary_en":"22:63 mocking and beating him: See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83857,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:63","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:63<\/strong> <em>mocking and beating him:<\/em> See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:63<\/strong> <em>mocking and beating him:<\/em> See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:63 mocking and beating him: See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.","summary_en":"22:63 mocking and beating him: See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111483,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:63","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:63<\/strong> <em>mocking and beating him:<\/em> See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:63<\/strong> <em>mocking and beating him:<\/em> See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:63 mocking and beating him: See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.","summary_en":"22:63 mocking and beating him: See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139109,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:63","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:63<\/strong> <em>mocking and beating him:<\/em> See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:63<\/strong> <em>mocking and beating him:<\/em> See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:63 mocking and beating him: See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.","summary_en":"22:63 mocking and beating him: See 18:32; Isa 50:6; 53:3-5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"64":[{"id":5191,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blasphemy","title_en":"Blasphemy","content_ro":"<h3>BLASPHEMY<\/h3>\n<p>Profane or contemptuous speech or writing about (or action toward) God. In a general sense, “blasphemy” can refer to any slander, including any word or action that insults or devalues another being. In Greek literature the term was used for insulting or deriding living or dead persons, but it was extended to cover the gods as well, including both doubting the power of and mocking the nature of a god.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, “blasphemy” always means to insult God, either by attacking him directly or mocking him indirectly. Either way the glory and honor of God are lessened, so blasphemy is the opposite of praise. An Israelite might directly insult the “Name” by cursing God (Lv 24:10-16) or deliberately disobey God’s law (Nm 15:30). Either of those blasphemies was punishable by death, as was idolatry, the ultimate blasphemy (Is 66:3). It was thought that Gentiles, who had never experienced the power and majesty of the Lord, were the most likely blasphemers. Thus the king of Assyria blasphemed in equating the Lord with the gods of the nations he had already conquered (2 Kgs 19:4-6, 22). For his arrogance the king was doomed by the word of the prophet Isaiah. God was also mocked when Israel was exiled (Is 52:5), when Edom derided the desolate “mountains of Israel” (Ez 35:12, <span>kjv<\/span>), and when the enemy scoffed that God had not protected Jerusalem (Ps 74:18; 1 Macc 2:6).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, blasphemy takes on the wider Greek meaning, for it includes slandering a human being (Mt 15:19; see also Rom 3:8; 1 Cor 10:30; Eph 4:31; Ti 3:2), as well as God. It even includes mocking angelic or demonic powers, which is just as wrong as mocking any other being (2 Pt 2:10-12, Jude 1:8-10). In other words, slander, derision, and mocking of any kind are totally condemned in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>The most common form of blasphemy in the NT is blasphemy against God. One might insult God directly (Rv 13:6; 16:9), mock his word (Ti 2:5), or reject his revelation and its bearer (Acts 6:11). Jesus was accused of blasphemy when he claimed to have a prerogative belonging to God—the power to forgive sins (Mk 2:7). John 10:33-36 reports an attempt to stone Jesus; his accusers said to him, “You, being a man, make yourself God” (v 33). Jesus was condemned by the highest Jewish court, the Sanhedrin, on the charge of blasphemy, because he claimed to be the Son of Man (the Messiah) but in their view had given no evidence that he was such an exalted personage, thus appearing to mock the Messiah and, by extension, to mock God himself (Mk 14:64).<\/p>\n<p>Naturally the early Christians viewed Jesus’ trial from another perspective: the guards insulting Jesus (Lk 22:64-65) and the crowds and two dying robbers mocking him on the cross (Mk 15:29-32) were the real blasphemers. Observing how their Lord had been treated, the church was prepared to accept insult as their own lot, both personally (1 Cor 4:13; 1 Tm 1:13; Rv 2:9) and as a response to their message (Acts 13:45; 18:6). On the other hand, the church recognized that even Christians could blaspheme by giving way under persecution (26:11), by teaching false doctrine (2 Pt 2:2), or by behaving in an unbecoming fashion, which would bring others to think less of Christ (Rom 2:24; Ti 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible makes clear that blasphemy is forgivable (Mt 12:32; Mk 3:28-29), but if a person will not repent, the only remedy is to turn him or her over to Satan to be taught the lesson (1 Tm 1:20).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLASPHEMY<\/h3>\n<p>Profane or contemptuous speech or writing about (or action toward) God. In a general sense, “blasphemy” can refer to any slander, including any word or action that insults or devalues another being. In Greek literature the term was used for insulting or deriding living or dead persons, but it was extended to cover the gods as well, including both doubting the power of and mocking the nature of a god.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, “blasphemy” always means to insult God, either by attacking him directly or mocking him indirectly. Either way the glory and honor of God are lessened, so blasphemy is the opposite of praise. An Israelite might directly insult the “Name” by cursing God (Lv 24:10-16) or deliberately disobey God’s law (Nm 15:30). Either of those blasphemies was punishable by death, as was idolatry, the ultimate blasphemy (Is 66:3). It was thought that Gentiles, who had never experienced the power and majesty of the Lord, were the most likely blasphemers. Thus the king of Assyria blasphemed in equating the Lord with the gods of the nations he had already conquered (2 Kgs 19:4-6, 22). For his arrogance the king was doomed by the word of the prophet Isaiah. God was also mocked when Israel was exiled (Is 52:5), when Edom derided the desolate “mountains of Israel” (Ez 35:12, <span>kjv<\/span>), and when the enemy scoffed that God had not protected Jerusalem (Ps 74:18; 1 Macc 2:6).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, blasphemy takes on the wider Greek meaning, for it includes slandering a human being (Mt 15:19; see also Rom 3:8; 1 Cor 10:30; Eph 4:31; Ti 3:2), as well as God. It even includes mocking angelic or demonic powers, which is just as wrong as mocking any other being (2 Pt 2:10-12, Jude 1:8-10). In other words, slander, derision, and mocking of any kind are totally condemned in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>The most common form of blasphemy in the NT is blasphemy against God. One might insult God directly (Rv 13:6; 16:9), mock his word (Ti 2:5), or reject his revelation and its bearer (Acts 6:11). Jesus was accused of blasphemy when he claimed to have a prerogative belonging to God—the power to forgive sins (Mk 2:7). John 10:33-36 reports an attempt to stone Jesus; his accusers said to him, “You, being a man, make yourself God” (v 33). Jesus was condemned by the highest Jewish court, the Sanhedrin, on the charge of blasphemy, because he claimed to be the Son of Man (the Messiah) but in their view had given no evidence that he was such an exalted personage, thus appearing to mock the Messiah and, by extension, to mock God himself (Mk 14:64).<\/p>\n<p>Naturally the early Christians viewed Jesus’ trial from another perspective: the guards insulting Jesus (Lk 22:64-65) and the crowds and two dying robbers mocking him on the cross (Mk 15:29-32) were the real blasphemers. Observing how their Lord had been treated, the church was prepared to accept insult as their own lot, both personally (1 Cor 4:13; 1 Tm 1:13; Rv 2:9) and as a response to their message (Acts 13:45; 18:6). On the other hand, the church recognized that even Christians could blaspheme by giving way under persecution (26:11), by teaching false doctrine (2 Pt 2:2), or by behaving in an unbecoming fashion, which would bring others to think less of Christ (Rom 2:24; Ti 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible makes clear that blasphemy is forgivable (Mt 12:32; Mk 3:28-29), but if a person will not repent, the only remedy is to turn him or her over to Satan to be taught the lesson (1 Tm 1:20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLASPHEMY Profane or contemptuous speech or writing about (or action toward) God. In a general sense, “blasphemy” can refer to any slander, including any word or action that insults or devalues another being. In Greek literature the term was used for insulting or deriding living or dead persons, but it was extended to cover the gods as well, including both doubting the power of and mocking the nature of a god. In the OT, “blasphemy” always means to insult God, either by attacking him directly...","summary_en":"BLASPHEMY Profane or contemptuous speech or writing about (or action toward) God. In a general sense, “blasphemy” can refer to any slander, including any word or action that insults or devalues another being. In Greek literature the term was used for insulting or deriding living or dead persons, but it was extended to cover the gods as well, including both doubting the power of and mocking the nature of a god. In the OT, “blasphemy” always means to insult God, either by attacking him directly...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56232,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:64","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:64","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:64<\/strong> <em>Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time?<\/em> Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:64<\/strong> <em>Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time?<\/em> Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:64 Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time? Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.","summary_en":"22:64 Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time? Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83858,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:64","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:64","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:64<\/strong> <em>Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time?<\/em> Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:64<\/strong> <em>Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time?<\/em> Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:64 Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time? Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.","summary_en":"22:64 Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time? Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111484,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:64","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:64","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:64<\/strong> <em>Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time?<\/em> Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:64<\/strong> <em>Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time?<\/em> Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:64 Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time? Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.","summary_en":"22:64 Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time? Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139110,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:64","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:64","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:64<\/strong> <em>Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time?<\/em> Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:64<\/strong> <em>Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time?<\/em> Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:64 Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time? Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.","summary_en":"22:64 Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time? Jesus had a reputation as a prophet (4:24; 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19), so the soldiers mocked this claim.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"66":[{"id":42213,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69839,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97465,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125091,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33892,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sanhedrin*","title_en":"Sanhedrin*","content_ro":"<h3>SANHEDRIN*<\/h3>\n<p>Supreme judicial council (<span>nlt<\/span> “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubtful (Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6; cf. Nm 11:16). These were probably informal gatherings of tribal elders (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 23:1). The likely origin of the Sanhedrin is to be found in the postexilic period, when those who reorganized Israel without a king made the ancient ruling families the basis of authority. The legislative assembly that emerged was a union of the nobility of the land and the priestly aristocracy (see Ezr 5:5; Neh 2:16). The influence of this council increased due to the relative freedom enjoyed under the Persians.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Hellenism in Israel in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> affirmed this government. Hellenistic cities commonly possessed democratic assemblies and a council. Jerusalem hosted an aristocratic council that was given its appropriate Greek title, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Gerousia<\/span><em>.<\/em> This council is first noted by Josephus, who records the decree of Antiochus III after his seizure of Jerusalem (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3). Yet even though the political climate shifted drastically, the council still remained in force. Judas Maccabeus expelled the old line of elders and installed another hereditary rulership stemming from the Hasmonean families. Thus the Gerousia continued as a council of the nobility. But in the first century <span>BC<\/span>, as the tensions between Sadducees and Pharisees were pulling apart the fabric of Judaism, the council underwent a transformation. From the time of Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), scribes of Pharisee persuasion entered the council. Thereafter, the Gerousia was a mixture: aristocratic nobility on the one hand (both lay and priestly) and the popular Pharisees on the other.<\/p>\n<p>The Romans left the council intact but more carefully defined the limits of its jurisdiction. As Judaism lost its self-government, the council lost much legislative and political power. Rome appointed the true powers of the land. For instance, Herod the Great began his rule in severe conflict with the old aristocracy, and in the end executed most of the Sanhedrin members (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). The prefects appointed the high priests and, as a symbol of control, from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 36 they kept the priests’ vestments in the Antonia fortress.<\/p>\n<p>The name Sanhedrin (Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span><em>,<\/em> from <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sun<\/span><em>,<\/em> “together,” and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hedra<\/span><em>,<\/em> “seat”) occurs for the first time in the reign of Herod the Great (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.3-5). This is the term used throughout the NT (22 times), along with “the elders” (Lk 22:66; Acts 22:5) and “gerousia” (Acts 5:21). The Mishnah provides still more titles: The Great Tribunal (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2), the Great Sanhedrin (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6), and the Sanhedrin of the 71 (<em>Shebuoth<\/em> 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the great war of <span>AD<\/span> 70, when the final vestiges of Jewish autonomy were destroyed by Rome, the Sanhedrin reconvened in Jamnia. Its power, however, was only theoretical (addressing religious issues primarily), and the Romans gave it little consideration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Character\">Character<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about the procedure for admission into the Sanhedrin, but because the council had aristocratic roots (and was not truly democratic), appointments were probably made from among the priests, leading scribes, and lay nobility. The Mishnah stipulates that the sole test of membership was rabbinic learning along with true Israelite descent (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:4). The council had 71 members (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6) divided into the following three categories: the high priests, the elders, and the scribes.<\/p>\n<h5>The High Priests<\/h5>\n<p>Usually from Sadducean backgrounds, these were the most powerful men of the Sanhedrin. Some scholars believe that they comprised an executive council of ten wealthy and distinguished citizens, on the pattern of several Greek and Roman cities. Tiberias in Galilee, for instance, was ruled by such a board, and Josephus refers to them as a body of “the ten foremost men” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.8.11; cf. Acts 4:6). One was the captain of the temple, who supervised temple proceedings and was commander of the temple guard (Acts 5:24-26). Others served as treasurers who controlled the wages of priests and workers and monitored the vast amount of money coming through the temple. Income came from sacrifices and market taxes; the payroll included as many as 18,000 men during Herod’s reconstruction of the temple. There was a president of the Sanhedrin who also headed this council and was called “the high priest” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.10.5). In the NT he is a leading figure: Caiaphas ruled in Jesus’ day (Mt 26:3), and Ananias in Paul’s day (Acts 23:2). In Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6, Annas is termed a high priest, but his title is emeritus, since his reign ended in <span>AD<\/span> 15.<\/p>\n<h5>The Elders<\/h5>\n<p>This was a major category and represented the priestly and financial aristocracy in Judea. Distinguished laymen, such as Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 15:43), shared the conservative views of the Sadducees and gave the assembly the diversity of a modern parliament.<\/p>\n<h5>The Scribes<\/h5>\n<p>These were the most recent members of the Sanhedrin. Mostly Pharisees, they were professional lawyers trained in theology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. They were organized in guilds and often followed celebrated teachers. One famous Sanhedrin scribe, Gamaliel, appears in the NT (Acts 5:34) and was the rabbinic scholar who instructed Paul (22:3).<\/p>\n<h5>In Jesus’ Day<\/h5>\n<p>The domain of the Sanhedrin was formally restricted to Judea, but there was a de facto influence that affected Galilee and even Damascus (cf. Acts 9:2; 22:5). The council was chiefly concerned to arbitrate matters of Jewish law when disagreements arose (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2). In all cases, its decision was final. It prosecuted charges of blasphemy, as in the cases of Jesus (Mt 26:65) and Stephen (Acts 6:12-14), and participated in criminal justice as well.<\/p>\n<p>It is still not known if the Sanhedrin had the power of capital punishment. Philo seems to indicate that violations to the temple could be prosecuted in the Roman period (<em>Legatio to Gaius,<\/em> 39). This may explain the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:58-60) and James (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.9.1). At any rate, Gentiles caught trespassing in the temple precincts were warned about an automatic death penalty. But the NT and the Talmud disagree with this. In the trial of Jesus, the authorities are compelled to involve Pilate who alone can put Jesus to death (Jn 18:31). According to the Talmud, the Sanhedrin lost this privilege “forty years before the destruction of the temple” (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> I 18a, 34; VII 24b).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudicialProcedure\">Judicial Procedure<\/p>\n<p>Despite the serious irregularities of Jesus’ trial, the formal procedures of Sanhedrin law describe a court that was fair and exceedingly concerned about the miscarriage of justice. Unfortunately, the procedural notes in the Mishnah only address guidelines for lesser courts (Sanhedrins with 23 members), but it can be reasonably conjectured that similar rules applied to the Great Sanhedrin of 71. In sections four and five of the Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin,<\/em> these guidelines are carefully set forth.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin sat in semicircular rows so that members could view one another. Two clerks sat at either end, taking notes and recording votes. Facing the assembly sat three rows of students, who were usually disciples of leading scribes. The accused stood in the middle facing the elders. He was required to show abject humility: he was dressed in a black robe as if in mourning and wore his hair disheveled (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). After questioning, he was dismissed and deliberations were private.<\/p>\n<p>The procedures for capital cases illustrate the concern for fairness. The defense would be heard first and then the accusations. An elder who had spoken for the defense could not then speak against the accused. Students could speak only for but never against the accused (but in noncapital cases they could do either). Members stood to vote, beginning with the youngest. Acquittal required a simple majority, but condemnation demanded a majority of two.<\/p>\n<p>In noncapital cases, the trial was heard during the daytime and the verdict could be given at night. In capital cases, both trial and verdict were during the day and thus open to more public scrutiny. In noncapital cases, any verdict could be reached the same day. In capital cases, the verdict of guilt (which was immediately followed by execution) had to be postponed one day because its consequences were irreversible. Hence, these trials were not to be held on the eve of the Sabbath or a festival day (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:1).<\/p>\n<p>The trial of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels shows many departures from the usual pattern of Sanhedrin justice. It seems clear that a miscarriage of justice was evidenced in Jesus’ arrest, interrogation, and death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Courts and Trials; Jerusalem Council.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SANHEDRIN*<\/h3>\n<p>Supreme judicial council (<span>nlt<\/span> “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubtful (Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6; cf. Nm 11:16). These were probably informal gatherings of tribal elders (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 23:1). The likely origin of the Sanhedrin is to be found in the postexilic period, when those who reorganized Israel without a king made the ancient ruling families the basis of authority. The legislative assembly that emerged was a union of the nobility of the land and the priestly aristocracy (see Ezr 5:5; Neh 2:16). The influence of this council increased due to the relative freedom enjoyed under the Persians.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Hellenism in Israel in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> affirmed this government. Hellenistic cities commonly possessed democratic assemblies and a council. Jerusalem hosted an aristocratic council that was given its appropriate Greek title, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Gerousia<\/span><em>.<\/em> This council is first noted by Josephus, who records the decree of Antiochus III after his seizure of Jerusalem (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3). Yet even though the political climate shifted drastically, the council still remained in force. Judas Maccabeus expelled the old line of elders and installed another hereditary rulership stemming from the Hasmonean families. Thus the Gerousia continued as a council of the nobility. But in the first century <span>BC<\/span>, as the tensions between Sadducees and Pharisees were pulling apart the fabric of Judaism, the council underwent a transformation. From the time of Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), scribes of Pharisee persuasion entered the council. Thereafter, the Gerousia was a mixture: aristocratic nobility on the one hand (both lay and priestly) and the popular Pharisees on the other.<\/p>\n<p>The Romans left the council intact but more carefully defined the limits of its jurisdiction. As Judaism lost its self-government, the council lost much legislative and political power. Rome appointed the true powers of the land. For instance, Herod the Great began his rule in severe conflict with the old aristocracy, and in the end executed most of the Sanhedrin members (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). The prefects appointed the high priests and, as a symbol of control, from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 36 they kept the priests’ vestments in the Antonia fortress.<\/p>\n<p>The name Sanhedrin (Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span><em>,<\/em> from <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sun<\/span><em>,<\/em> “together,” and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hedra<\/span><em>,<\/em> “seat”) occurs for the first time in the reign of Herod the Great (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.3-5). This is the term used throughout the NT (22 times), along with “the elders” (Lk 22:66; Acts 22:5) and “gerousia” (Acts 5:21). The Mishnah provides still more titles: The Great Tribunal (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2), the Great Sanhedrin (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6), and the Sanhedrin of the 71 (<em>Shebuoth<\/em> 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the great war of <span>AD<\/span> 70, when the final vestiges of Jewish autonomy were destroyed by Rome, the Sanhedrin reconvened in Jamnia. Its power, however, was only theoretical (addressing religious issues primarily), and the Romans gave it little consideration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Character\">Character<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about the procedure for admission into the Sanhedrin, but because the council had aristocratic roots (and was not truly democratic), appointments were probably made from among the priests, leading scribes, and lay nobility. The Mishnah stipulates that the sole test of membership was rabbinic learning along with true Israelite descent (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:4). The council had 71 members (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6) divided into the following three categories: the high priests, the elders, and the scribes.<\/p>\n<h5>The High Priests<\/h5>\n<p>Usually from Sadducean backgrounds, these were the most powerful men of the Sanhedrin. Some scholars believe that they comprised an executive council of ten wealthy and distinguished citizens, on the pattern of several Greek and Roman cities. Tiberias in Galilee, for instance, was ruled by such a board, and Josephus refers to them as a body of “the ten foremost men” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.8.11; cf. Acts 4:6). One was the captain of the temple, who supervised temple proceedings and was commander of the temple guard (Acts 5:24-26). Others served as treasurers who controlled the wages of priests and workers and monitored the vast amount of money coming through the temple. Income came from sacrifices and market taxes; the payroll included as many as 18,000 men during Herod’s reconstruction of the temple. There was a president of the Sanhedrin who also headed this council and was called “the high priest” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.10.5). In the NT he is a leading figure: Caiaphas ruled in Jesus’ day (Mt 26:3), and Ananias in Paul’s day (Acts 23:2). In Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6, Annas is termed a high priest, but his title is emeritus, since his reign ended in <span>AD<\/span> 15.<\/p>\n<h5>The Elders<\/h5>\n<p>This was a major category and represented the priestly and financial aristocracy in Judea. Distinguished laymen, such as Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 15:43), shared the conservative views of the Sadducees and gave the assembly the diversity of a modern parliament.<\/p>\n<h5>The Scribes<\/h5>\n<p>These were the most recent members of the Sanhedrin. Mostly Pharisees, they were professional lawyers trained in theology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. They were organized in guilds and often followed celebrated teachers. One famous Sanhedrin scribe, Gamaliel, appears in the NT (Acts 5:34) and was the rabbinic scholar who instructed Paul (22:3).<\/p>\n<h5>In Jesus’ Day<\/h5>\n<p>The domain of the Sanhedrin was formally restricted to Judea, but there was a de facto influence that affected Galilee and even Damascus (cf. Acts 9:2; 22:5). The council was chiefly concerned to arbitrate matters of Jewish law when disagreements arose (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2). In all cases, its decision was final. It prosecuted charges of blasphemy, as in the cases of Jesus (Mt 26:65) and Stephen (Acts 6:12-14), and participated in criminal justice as well.<\/p>\n<p>It is still not known if the Sanhedrin had the power of capital punishment. Philo seems to indicate that violations to the temple could be prosecuted in the Roman period (<em>Legatio to Gaius,<\/em> 39). This may explain the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:58-60) and James (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.9.1). At any rate, Gentiles caught trespassing in the temple precincts were warned about an automatic death penalty. But the NT and the Talmud disagree with this. In the trial of Jesus, the authorities are compelled to involve Pilate who alone can put Jesus to death (Jn 18:31). According to the Talmud, the Sanhedrin lost this privilege “forty years before the destruction of the temple” (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> I 18a, 34; VII 24b).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudicialProcedure\">Judicial Procedure<\/p>\n<p>Despite the serious irregularities of Jesus’ trial, the formal procedures of Sanhedrin law describe a court that was fair and exceedingly concerned about the miscarriage of justice. Unfortunately, the procedural notes in the Mishnah only address guidelines for lesser courts (Sanhedrins with 23 members), but it can be reasonably conjectured that similar rules applied to the Great Sanhedrin of 71. In sections four and five of the Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin,<\/em> these guidelines are carefully set forth.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin sat in semicircular rows so that members could view one another. Two clerks sat at either end, taking notes and recording votes. Facing the assembly sat three rows of students, who were usually disciples of leading scribes. The accused stood in the middle facing the elders. He was required to show abject humility: he was dressed in a black robe as if in mourning and wore his hair disheveled (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). After questioning, he was dismissed and deliberations were private.<\/p>\n<p>The procedures for capital cases illustrate the concern for fairness. The defense would be heard first and then the accusations. An elder who had spoken for the defense could not then speak against the accused. Students could speak only for but never against the accused (but in noncapital cases they could do either). Members stood to vote, beginning with the youngest. Acquittal required a simple majority, but condemnation demanded a majority of two.<\/p>\n<p>In noncapital cases, the trial was heard during the daytime and the verdict could be given at night. In capital cases, both trial and verdict were during the day and thus open to more public scrutiny. In noncapital cases, any verdict could be reached the same day. In capital cases, the verdict of guilt (which was immediately followed by execution) had to be postponed one day because its consequences were irreversible. Hence, these trials were not to be held on the eve of the Sabbath or a festival day (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:1).<\/p>\n<p>The trial of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels shows many departures from the usual pattern of Sanhedrin justice. It seems clear that a miscarriage of justice was evidenced in Jesus’ arrest, interrogation, and death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Courts and Trials; Jerusalem Council.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SANHEDRIN* Supreme judicial council (nlt “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church. History The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubt...","summary_en":"SANHEDRIN* Supreme judicial council (nlt “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church. History The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubt...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34118,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Scribe","title_en":"Scribe","content_ro":"<h3>SCRIBE<\/h3>\n<p>Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPreexilicTimes\">Scribes in Preexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion of the term “scribe” and has no particular religious connotation. Scribes were employed to keep accounts or transcribe legal information (Jer 32:12), military data (2 Chr 26:11), other public documents (Jgs 8:14; Is 50:1), or personal correspondence (Jer 36:18). These secretaries were essential to royal administrations, and there is frequent mention of a chief scribe who functioned as a court recorder (1 Kgs 4:3; 2 Chr 24:11), adviser (2 Sm 8:16-17; 2 Kgs 18:18; 22:12; 1 Chr 27:32; Is 36:3), and financial overseer (2 Kgs 22:3-4). Secretaries or scribes were associated with the priesthood as well, serving as recorders for temple affairs (1 Chr 24:6; 2 Chr 34:13-15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPostexilicTimes\">Scribes in Postexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>With the restoration of Judaism under Ezra and Nehemiah, the term “scribe” begins to be associated more narrowly with those who gathered together, studied, and interpreted the Torah (Jewish law). They became, in essence, a separate profession of teachers (although unpaid), able to preserve accurately the law of Moses and interpret it to meet conditions in postexilic times. In this initial period, Ezra himself appears as the ideal “scribe who studied and taught the commands and laws of the <span>Lord<\/span> to Israel” (Ezr 7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). In Ecclesiasticus, the scribe is portrayed as one who, because of his diligent study of the Law, the Prophets, and Writings (Ecclus 38:24ff; 39:1), is able to penetrate the hidden meanings of texts (39:2-3) and thus is able to serve as judge and counsel for the affairs of the people and state (38:33; 39:4-8). Because of his invaluable place in a society governed by the Torah, the scribe is worthy of praise and veneration throughout succeeding generations (39:9). By the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the scribes were a fairly distinct class in Jewish society. They appear as such during the Maccabean wars, acting as a negotiating body with the rival Syrians (1 Macc 7:12). It is also significant that, from this time forward, the history of the scribe in Jewish life is closely linked with the rise of the Pharisees. Although there were apparently some scribes affiliated with the rival Sadducean party, the party of the Pharisees, with its absolute devotion to the law (including the oral law), became the primary religiopolitical affiliation for the scribes (see the close connection in the NT: Mt 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; Mk 7:5; Lk 6:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TrainingandStatus\">Training and Status<\/p>\n<p>The training of scribes initially occurred within priestly family-based guilds that guaranteed the regulation and perpetuation of this position (1 Chr 2:55). Later, scribal training in the law became open to members of all classes, with the eventual result, by Jesus’ time, of scribes from nonpriestly families being far more numerous and influential. Training in the law began at an early age under the personal supervision of a teacher (rabbi), who gave instructions in all matters pertaining to the law and its interpretation for present needs. Because the written law of Moses could not possibly speak directly to conditions in postexilic times, the oral interpretation and application of the written law to meet such current needs was a significant contribution by the scribes. Such oral law promulgated by them was regarded as equal to the written law and equally binding for those desiring to please God (see Mk 7:6-13). This important function, lying at the heart of Jewish life, accounts for the participation of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in order to make legal decisions in keeping with the law, obviously needed the presence of those most knowledgeable about the minutest details of the Torah and the principles governing its application to new circumstances. The scribes, consequently, were the only members outside the aristocratic high priests and elders to be represented in this Jewish supreme court (Mt 26:57; Mk 14:43, 53; Lk 22:66; Acts 23:9). Being the authoritative instructors of the law both within the temple (Lk 2:46) and within the various synagogues of Judea and Galilee (5:17), as well as prominent members of the Sanhedrin, the scribes were greatly respected within the Jewish community. They wore special robes (Mk 12:38) with memorial fringes at the bottom and phylacteries, or “prayer boxes,” hanging from the arms (Mt 23:5). Such attire made their presence obvious and occasioned the rising or bowing of the common people when they passed (Mk 12:38). They were addressed with respect as “rabbi” or “master” (Mt 23:7) and were given the place of honor at worship as well as at social affairs (Mt 23:2; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46). Indeed, the high regard the Jews held for their scribes is testified by the fact that such teachers of the law were buried alongside the tombs of the patriarchs and prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheScribesinJesusDay\">The Scribes in Jesus’ Day<\/p>\n<p>The scribes appear predominantly in the ministry of Jesus as those concerned with the circumspectness of legal observance. Luke refers to the scribes as “lawyers,” thereby describing their chief function as interpreters of the Jewish law in a way that communicated to his gentile audience. It is often found, therefore, that the scribes were critical members of Jesus’ audience, accusing him of violating the law on numerous occasions: in forgiving sins (Mt 9:1-3; Lk 5:17-26), in breaking their notion of Sabbath observance through work (Lk 6:1-2) and healing (vv 6-11), in not following their accepted ceremonial washings (Mk 7:2-5), and in ignoring their practice of fasting (Lk 5:33-39). Not surprisingly, they especially disapproved of Jesus’ practice of mingling with the unclean and outcasts of Jewish society (Mk 2:16-17; Lk 15:1-2). In a similar light, they are not unfrequently found presenting questions concerning the law for the purpose of tricking Jesus (Mk 7:5; 12:28, 35; Lk 11:53; Jn 8:3-4). In a similar fashion, they demanded that Jesus make his identity clear (Mt 12:38) and reveal the source of his authority to perform miracles (Mk 3:22; Lk 20:1-4). Although there is evidence that a minority of the scribes accepted Jesus (Mt 8:19; 13:52; Mk 12:32; Jn 3:1-2), their primary attitude toward Jesus was one of hostility. As previously suggested, this was partly due to Jesus’ differing expression of fidelity to the Mosaic law and his openness toward the outcasts. It was also partly due to the rising popularity of Jesus among the people, which posed a threat to their own authority (Mt 7:29) and to the safety of the city (Mt 21:15; Mk 11:18). Certainly, another major contributing factor of their opposition to Jesus was his exposure of their hypocrisy and corruption. In his rebukes of the scribes and the Pharisees, Jesus openly accused them of catering to public approval (Mt 23:5-7; Mk 12:38-39; Lk 11:43). While appearing to be outwardly correct and holy, they were inwardly corrupt (Mt 23:25-28; Lk 11:39-41). Jesus also attacked the principle of oral law taught by the scribes, which they demanded that the people follow. Jesus charged that the oral law was a “heavy burden” that the scribes themselves did not even bother to follow (Mt 23:2-4, 13-22; Lk 11:46). While emphasizing the minor points of the law, the scribes were also guilty of ignoring the weightier concerns of justice, mercy, and faith (Mt 23:23-24; Mk 12:40; Lk 11:42). Contrary to being the descendants of the prophets, as the scribes held themselves to be, the scribes (Jesus claimed) would have killed the prophets if they had lived in their day (Mt 23:29-36; Lk 20:9-19).<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising to find, therefore, the scribes anxious to get rid of Jesus (Mk 14:1; Lk 11:53). His more flexible interpretation of the law posed a clear threat to their position and authority within the community. The scribes joined forces with their normal opponents (the high priesthood) to engineer Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43). When Jesus appeared before them and the rest of the Sanhedrin, they worked with the other leaders to construct a case against him worthy of death (Mt 26:57-66). When taking Jesus before Herod, they stood by and shouted their accusations with the others (Lk 23:10). Finally, they participated with other members of the Sanhedrin in mocking Jesus on the cross, demanding that Jesus save himself by coming down from the cross (Mt 27:41-43). Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the scribes continued with the other elements of the Sanhedrin to oppose the early Christian church, and they brought about Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 6:12-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Pharisees; Writer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SCRIBE<\/h3>\n<p>Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPreexilicTimes\">Scribes in Preexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion of the term “scribe” and has no particular religious connotation. Scribes were employed to keep accounts or transcribe legal information (Jer 32:12), military data (2 Chr 26:11), other public documents (Jgs 8:14; Is 50:1), or personal correspondence (Jer 36:18). These secretaries were essential to royal administrations, and there is frequent mention of a chief scribe who functioned as a court recorder (1 Kgs 4:3; 2 Chr 24:11), adviser (2 Sm 8:16-17; 2 Kgs 18:18; 22:12; 1 Chr 27:32; Is 36:3), and financial overseer (2 Kgs 22:3-4). Secretaries or scribes were associated with the priesthood as well, serving as recorders for temple affairs (1 Chr 24:6; 2 Chr 34:13-15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPostexilicTimes\">Scribes in Postexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>With the restoration of Judaism under Ezra and Nehemiah, the term “scribe” begins to be associated more narrowly with those who gathered together, studied, and interpreted the Torah (Jewish law). They became, in essence, a separate profession of teachers (although unpaid), able to preserve accurately the law of Moses and interpret it to meet conditions in postexilic times. In this initial period, Ezra himself appears as the ideal “scribe who studied and taught the commands and laws of the <span>Lord<\/span> to Israel” (Ezr 7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). In Ecclesiasticus, the scribe is portrayed as one who, because of his diligent study of the Law, the Prophets, and Writings (Ecclus 38:24ff; 39:1), is able to penetrate the hidden meanings of texts (39:2-3) and thus is able to serve as judge and counsel for the affairs of the people and state (38:33; 39:4-8). Because of his invaluable place in a society governed by the Torah, the scribe is worthy of praise and veneration throughout succeeding generations (39:9). By the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the scribes were a fairly distinct class in Jewish society. They appear as such during the Maccabean wars, acting as a negotiating body with the rival Syrians (1 Macc 7:12). It is also significant that, from this time forward, the history of the scribe in Jewish life is closely linked with the rise of the Pharisees. Although there were apparently some scribes affiliated with the rival Sadducean party, the party of the Pharisees, with its absolute devotion to the law (including the oral law), became the primary religiopolitical affiliation for the scribes (see the close connection in the NT: Mt 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; Mk 7:5; Lk 6:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TrainingandStatus\">Training and Status<\/p>\n<p>The training of scribes initially occurred within priestly family-based guilds that guaranteed the regulation and perpetuation of this position (1 Chr 2:55). Later, scribal training in the law became open to members of all classes, with the eventual result, by Jesus’ time, of scribes from nonpriestly families being far more numerous and influential. Training in the law began at an early age under the personal supervision of a teacher (rabbi), who gave instructions in all matters pertaining to the law and its interpretation for present needs. Because the written law of Moses could not possibly speak directly to conditions in postexilic times, the oral interpretation and application of the written law to meet such current needs was a significant contribution by the scribes. Such oral law promulgated by them was regarded as equal to the written law and equally binding for those desiring to please God (see Mk 7:6-13). This important function, lying at the heart of Jewish life, accounts for the participation of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in order to make legal decisions in keeping with the law, obviously needed the presence of those most knowledgeable about the minutest details of the Torah and the principles governing its application to new circumstances. The scribes, consequently, were the only members outside the aristocratic high priests and elders to be represented in this Jewish supreme court (Mt 26:57; Mk 14:43, 53; Lk 22:66; Acts 23:9). Being the authoritative instructors of the law both within the temple (Lk 2:46) and within the various synagogues of Judea and Galilee (5:17), as well as prominent members of the Sanhedrin, the scribes were greatly respected within the Jewish community. They wore special robes (Mk 12:38) with memorial fringes at the bottom and phylacteries, or “prayer boxes,” hanging from the arms (Mt 23:5). Such attire made their presence obvious and occasioned the rising or bowing of the common people when they passed (Mk 12:38). They were addressed with respect as “rabbi” or “master” (Mt 23:7) and were given the place of honor at worship as well as at social affairs (Mt 23:2; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46). Indeed, the high regard the Jews held for their scribes is testified by the fact that such teachers of the law were buried alongside the tombs of the patriarchs and prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheScribesinJesusDay\">The Scribes in Jesus’ Day<\/p>\n<p>The scribes appear predominantly in the ministry of Jesus as those concerned with the circumspectness of legal observance. Luke refers to the scribes as “lawyers,” thereby describing their chief function as interpreters of the Jewish law in a way that communicated to his gentile audience. It is often found, therefore, that the scribes were critical members of Jesus’ audience, accusing him of violating the law on numerous occasions: in forgiving sins (Mt 9:1-3; Lk 5:17-26), in breaking their notion of Sabbath observance through work (Lk 6:1-2) and healing (vv 6-11), in not following their accepted ceremonial washings (Mk 7:2-5), and in ignoring their practice of fasting (Lk 5:33-39). Not surprisingly, they especially disapproved of Jesus’ practice of mingling with the unclean and outcasts of Jewish society (Mk 2:16-17; Lk 15:1-2). In a similar light, they are not unfrequently found presenting questions concerning the law for the purpose of tricking Jesus (Mk 7:5; 12:28, 35; Lk 11:53; Jn 8:3-4). In a similar fashion, they demanded that Jesus make his identity clear (Mt 12:38) and reveal the source of his authority to perform miracles (Mk 3:22; Lk 20:1-4). Although there is evidence that a minority of the scribes accepted Jesus (Mt 8:19; 13:52; Mk 12:32; Jn 3:1-2), their primary attitude toward Jesus was one of hostility. As previously suggested, this was partly due to Jesus’ differing expression of fidelity to the Mosaic law and his openness toward the outcasts. It was also partly due to the rising popularity of Jesus among the people, which posed a threat to their own authority (Mt 7:29) and to the safety of the city (Mt 21:15; Mk 11:18). Certainly, another major contributing factor of their opposition to Jesus was his exposure of their hypocrisy and corruption. In his rebukes of the scribes and the Pharisees, Jesus openly accused them of catering to public approval (Mt 23:5-7; Mk 12:38-39; Lk 11:43). While appearing to be outwardly correct and holy, they were inwardly corrupt (Mt 23:25-28; Lk 11:39-41). Jesus also attacked the principle of oral law taught by the scribes, which they demanded that the people follow. Jesus charged that the oral law was a “heavy burden” that the scribes themselves did not even bother to follow (Mt 23:2-4, 13-22; Lk 11:46). While emphasizing the minor points of the law, the scribes were also guilty of ignoring the weightier concerns of justice, mercy, and faith (Mt 23:23-24; Mk 12:40; Lk 11:42). Contrary to being the descendants of the prophets, as the scribes held themselves to be, the scribes (Jesus claimed) would have killed the prophets if they had lived in their day (Mt 23:29-36; Lk 20:9-19).<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising to find, therefore, the scribes anxious to get rid of Jesus (Mk 14:1; Lk 11:53). His more flexible interpretation of the law posed a clear threat to their position and authority within the community. The scribes joined forces with their normal opponents (the high priesthood) to engineer Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43). When Jesus appeared before them and the rest of the Sanhedrin, they worked with the other leaders to construct a case against him worthy of death (Mt 26:57-66). When taking Jesus before Herod, they stood by and shouted their accusations with the others (Lk 23:10). Finally, they participated with other members of the Sanhedrin in mocking Jesus on the cross, demanding that Jesus save himself by coming down from the cross (Mt 27:41-43). Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the scribes continued with the other elements of the Sanhedrin to oppose the early Christian church, and they brought about Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 6:12-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Pharisees; Writer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SCRIBE Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus. Scribes in Preexilic Times The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion...","summary_en":"SCRIBE Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus. Scribes in Preexilic Times The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56233,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:66","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:66","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:66<\/strong> <em>At daybreak:<\/em> It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • <em>all the elders of the people assembled:<\/em> The Jewish <em>high council<\/em> (Greek <em>Sanhedrin<\/em>) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:66<\/strong> <em>At daybreak:<\/em> It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • <em>all the elders of the people assembled:<\/em> The Jewish <em>high council<\/em> (Greek <em>Sanhedrin<\/em>) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:66 At daybreak: It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • all the elders of the people assembled: The Jewish high council (Greek Sanhedrin) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).","summary_en":"22:66 At daybreak: It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • all the elders of the people assembled: The Jewish high council (Greek Sanhedrin) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83859,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:66","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:66","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:66<\/strong> <em>At daybreak:<\/em> It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • <em>all the elders of the people assembled:<\/em> The Jewish <em>high council<\/em> (Greek <em>Sanhedrin<\/em>) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:66<\/strong> <em>At daybreak:<\/em> It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • <em>all the elders of the people assembled:<\/em> The Jewish <em>high council<\/em> (Greek <em>Sanhedrin<\/em>) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:66 At daybreak: It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • all the elders of the people assembled: The Jewish high council (Greek Sanhedrin) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).","summary_en":"22:66 At daybreak: It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • all the elders of the people assembled: The Jewish high council (Greek Sanhedrin) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111485,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:66","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:66","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:66<\/strong> <em>At daybreak:<\/em> It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • <em>all the elders of the people assembled:<\/em> The Jewish <em>high council<\/em> (Greek <em>Sanhedrin<\/em>) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:66<\/strong> <em>At daybreak:<\/em> It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • <em>all the elders of the people assembled:<\/em> The Jewish <em>high council<\/em> (Greek <em>Sanhedrin<\/em>) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:66 At daybreak: It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • all the elders of the people assembled: The Jewish high council (Greek Sanhedrin) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).","summary_en":"22:66 At daybreak: It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • all the elders of the people assembled: The Jewish high council (Greek Sanhedrin) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139111,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:66","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:66","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:66<\/strong> <em>At daybreak:<\/em> It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • <em>all the elders of the people assembled:<\/em> The Jewish <em>high council<\/em> (Greek <em>Sanhedrin<\/em>) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:66<\/strong> <em>At daybreak:<\/em> It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • <em>all the elders of the people assembled:<\/em> The Jewish <em>high council<\/em> (Greek <em>Sanhedrin<\/em>) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:66 At daybreak: It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • all the elders of the people assembled: The Jewish high council (Greek Sanhedrin) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).","summary_en":"22:66 At daybreak: It was Friday morning (see study note on 22:34). • all the elders of the people assembled: The Jewish high council (Greek Sanhedrin) was originally made up of the Jerusalem nobility, both civil leaders and priests, with the high priest as its head. In Jesus’ time, the Sadducees still controlled the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:17), though leading Pharisees had also gained a prominent place on the council (Acts 23:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65688,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hope for the Messiah","title_en":"Hope for the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>Hope for the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> is equivalent to the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christ<\/span>—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the future king that Israel hoped for. There was widespread hope that a king from David’s line would reestablish David’s dynasty and reign in righteousness and justice on David’s throne in Jerusalem. This hope had its foundation in 2 Sam 7:11-16, where God promised King David that he would raise up descendants after him and establish his throne forever. With the decline and subsequent collapse of Israel as a kingdom, the Old Testament prophets predicted the coming of the Messiah (Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25), the king who would deliver God’s people and reign forever on David’s throne.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel writers take a special interest in showing that Jesus is truly the promised Messiah (see e.g., Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:32-33, 69-70), but that he has fulfilled the messianic promises in a surprising way. After Peter confessed that Jesus is “the Messiah sent from God,” Jesus immediately began teaching about the Messiah’s suffering (Luke 9:20-22). As Jesus approached Jerusalem for the last time, he was recognized as the King coming in the name of the Lord (Luke 18:36-38; 19:36-38), but then he was rejected (Luke 22:66-71) and crucified, mocked as “king of the Jews” and “God’s Messiah” (Luke 23:35-39).<\/p>\n<p>On the third day, however, Jesus rose victorious from the dead, just as he predicted. During his appearances to the disciples he revealed that the Scriptures predicted all along that “the Messiah would have to suffer all these things before entering his glory” (24:26). Jesus’ death and resurrection confirm that he is truly the Messiah and that his death brings restoration and forgiveness of sins (24:46-47).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:11-16; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25; Luke 2:25-32; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hope for the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> is equivalent to the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christ<\/span>—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the future king that Israel hoped for. There was widespread hope that a king from David’s line would reestablish David’s dynasty and reign in righteousness and justice on David’s throne in Jerusalem. This hope had its foundation in 2 Sam 7:11-16, where God promised King David that he would raise up descendants after him and establish his throne forever. With the decline and subsequent collapse of Israel as a kingdom, the Old Testament prophets predicted the coming of the Messiah (Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25), the king who would deliver God’s people and reign forever on David’s throne.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel writers take a special interest in showing that Jesus is truly the promised Messiah (see e.g., Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:32-33, 69-70), but that he has fulfilled the messianic promises in a surprising way. After Peter confessed that Jesus is “the Messiah sent from God,” Jesus immediately began teaching about the Messiah’s suffering (Luke 9:20-22). As Jesus approached Jerusalem for the last time, he was recognized as the King coming in the name of the Lord (Luke 18:36-38; 19:36-38), but then he was rejected (Luke 22:66-71) and crucified, mocked as “king of the Jews” and “God’s Messiah” (Luke 23:35-39).<\/p>\n<p>On the third day, however, Jesus rose victorious from the dead, just as he predicted. During his appearances to the disciples he revealed that the Scriptures predicted all along that “the Messiah would have to suffer all these things before entering his glory” (24:26). Jesus’ death and resurrection confirm that he is truly the Messiah and that his death brings restoration and forgiveness of sins (24:46-47).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:11-16; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25; Luke 2:25-32; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hope for the Messiah In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people. The Hebrew word Messiah is equivalent to the Greek word Christ—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the ...","summary_en":"Hope for the Messiah In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people. The Hebrew word Messiah is equivalent to the Greek word Christ—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93314,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hope for the Messiah","title_en":"Hope for the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>Hope for the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> is equivalent to the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christ<\/span>—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the future king that Israel hoped for. There was widespread hope that a king from David’s line would reestablish David’s dynasty and reign in righteousness and justice on David’s throne in Jerusalem. This hope had its foundation in 2 Sam 7:11-16, where God promised King David that he would raise up descendants after him and establish his throne forever. With the decline and subsequent collapse of Israel as a kingdom, the Old Testament prophets predicted the coming of the Messiah (Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25), the king who would deliver God’s people and reign forever on David’s throne.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel writers take a special interest in showing that Jesus is truly the promised Messiah (see e.g., Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:32-33, 69-70), but that he has fulfilled the messianic promises in a surprising way. After Peter confessed that Jesus is “the Messiah sent from God,” Jesus immediately began teaching about the Messiah’s suffering (Luke 9:20-22). As Jesus approached Jerusalem for the last time, he was recognized as the King coming in the name of the Lord (Luke 18:36-38; 19:36-38), but then he was rejected (Luke 22:66-71) and crucified, mocked as “king of the Jews” and “God’s Messiah” (Luke 23:35-39).<\/p>\n<p>On the third day, however, Jesus rose victorious from the dead, just as he predicted. During his appearances to the disciples he revealed that the Scriptures predicted all along that “the Messiah would have to suffer all these things before entering his glory” (24:26). Jesus’ death and resurrection confirm that he is truly the Messiah and that his death brings restoration and forgiveness of sins (24:46-47).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:11-16; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25; Luke 2:25-32; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hope for the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> is equivalent to the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christ<\/span>—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the future king that Israel hoped for. There was widespread hope that a king from David’s line would reestablish David’s dynasty and reign in righteousness and justice on David’s throne in Jerusalem. This hope had its foundation in 2 Sam 7:11-16, where God promised King David that he would raise up descendants after him and establish his throne forever. With the decline and subsequent collapse of Israel as a kingdom, the Old Testament prophets predicted the coming of the Messiah (Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25), the king who would deliver God’s people and reign forever on David’s throne.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel writers take a special interest in showing that Jesus is truly the promised Messiah (see e.g., Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:32-33, 69-70), but that he has fulfilled the messianic promises in a surprising way. After Peter confessed that Jesus is “the Messiah sent from God,” Jesus immediately began teaching about the Messiah’s suffering (Luke 9:20-22). As Jesus approached Jerusalem for the last time, he was recognized as the King coming in the name of the Lord (Luke 18:36-38; 19:36-38), but then he was rejected (Luke 22:66-71) and crucified, mocked as “king of the Jews” and “God’s Messiah” (Luke 23:35-39).<\/p>\n<p>On the third day, however, Jesus rose victorious from the dead, just as he predicted. During his appearances to the disciples he revealed that the Scriptures predicted all along that “the Messiah would have to suffer all these things before entering his glory” (24:26). Jesus’ death and resurrection confirm that he is truly the Messiah and that his death brings restoration and forgiveness of sins (24:46-47).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:11-16; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25; Luke 2:25-32; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hope for the Messiah In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people. The Hebrew word Messiah is equivalent to the Greek word Christ—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the ...","summary_en":"Hope for the Messiah In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people. The Hebrew word Messiah is equivalent to the Greek word Christ—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120940,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hope for the Messiah","title_en":"Hope for the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>Hope for the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> is equivalent to the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christ<\/span>—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the future king that Israel hoped for. There was widespread hope that a king from David’s line would reestablish David’s dynasty and reign in righteousness and justice on David’s throne in Jerusalem. This hope had its foundation in 2 Sam 7:11-16, where God promised King David that he would raise up descendants after him and establish his throne forever. With the decline and subsequent collapse of Israel as a kingdom, the Old Testament prophets predicted the coming of the Messiah (Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25), the king who would deliver God’s people and reign forever on David’s throne.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel writers take a special interest in showing that Jesus is truly the promised Messiah (see e.g., Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:32-33, 69-70), but that he has fulfilled the messianic promises in a surprising way. After Peter confessed that Jesus is “the Messiah sent from God,” Jesus immediately began teaching about the Messiah’s suffering (Luke 9:20-22). As Jesus approached Jerusalem for the last time, he was recognized as the King coming in the name of the Lord (Luke 18:36-38; 19:36-38), but then he was rejected (Luke 22:66-71) and crucified, mocked as “king of the Jews” and “God’s Messiah” (Luke 23:35-39).<\/p>\n<p>On the third day, however, Jesus rose victorious from the dead, just as he predicted. During his appearances to the disciples he revealed that the Scriptures predicted all along that “the Messiah would have to suffer all these things before entering his glory” (24:26). Jesus’ death and resurrection confirm that he is truly the Messiah and that his death brings restoration and forgiveness of sins (24:46-47).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:11-16; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25; Luke 2:25-32; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hope for the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> is equivalent to the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christ<\/span>—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the future king that Israel hoped for. There was widespread hope that a king from David’s line would reestablish David’s dynasty and reign in righteousness and justice on David’s throne in Jerusalem. This hope had its foundation in 2 Sam 7:11-16, where God promised King David that he would raise up descendants after him and establish his throne forever. With the decline and subsequent collapse of Israel as a kingdom, the Old Testament prophets predicted the coming of the Messiah (Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25), the king who would deliver God’s people and reign forever on David’s throne.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel writers take a special interest in showing that Jesus is truly the promised Messiah (see e.g., Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:32-33, 69-70), but that he has fulfilled the messianic promises in a surprising way. After Peter confessed that Jesus is “the Messiah sent from God,” Jesus immediately began teaching about the Messiah’s suffering (Luke 9:20-22). As Jesus approached Jerusalem for the last time, he was recognized as the King coming in the name of the Lord (Luke 18:36-38; 19:36-38), but then he was rejected (Luke 22:66-71) and crucified, mocked as “king of the Jews” and “God’s Messiah” (Luke 23:35-39).<\/p>\n<p>On the third day, however, Jesus rose victorious from the dead, just as he predicted. During his appearances to the disciples he revealed that the Scriptures predicted all along that “the Messiah would have to suffer all these things before entering his glory” (24:26). Jesus’ death and resurrection confirm that he is truly the Messiah and that his death brings restoration and forgiveness of sins (24:46-47).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:11-16; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25; Luke 2:25-32; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hope for the Messiah In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people. The Hebrew word Messiah is equivalent to the Greek word Christ—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the ...","summary_en":"Hope for the Messiah In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people. The Hebrew word Messiah is equivalent to the Greek word Christ—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148566,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hope for the Messiah","title_en":"Hope for the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>Hope for the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> is equivalent to the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christ<\/span>—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the future king that Israel hoped for. There was widespread hope that a king from David’s line would reestablish David’s dynasty and reign in righteousness and justice on David’s throne in Jerusalem. This hope had its foundation in 2 Sam 7:11-16, where God promised King David that he would raise up descendants after him and establish his throne forever. With the decline and subsequent collapse of Israel as a kingdom, the Old Testament prophets predicted the coming of the Messiah (Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25), the king who would deliver God’s people and reign forever on David’s throne.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel writers take a special interest in showing that Jesus is truly the promised Messiah (see e.g., Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:32-33, 69-70), but that he has fulfilled the messianic promises in a surprising way. After Peter confessed that Jesus is “the Messiah sent from God,” Jesus immediately began teaching about the Messiah’s suffering (Luke 9:20-22). As Jesus approached Jerusalem for the last time, he was recognized as the King coming in the name of the Lord (Luke 18:36-38; 19:36-38), but then he was rejected (Luke 22:66-71) and crucified, mocked as “king of the Jews” and “God’s Messiah” (Luke 23:35-39).<\/p>\n<p>On the third day, however, Jesus rose victorious from the dead, just as he predicted. During his appearances to the disciples he revealed that the Scriptures predicted all along that “the Messiah would have to suffer all these things before entering his glory” (24:26). Jesus’ death and resurrection confirm that he is truly the Messiah and that his death brings restoration and forgiveness of sins (24:46-47).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:11-16; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25; Luke 2:25-32; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hope for the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> is equivalent to the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christ<\/span>—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the future king that Israel hoped for. There was widespread hope that a king from David’s line would reestablish David’s dynasty and reign in righteousness and justice on David’s throne in Jerusalem. This hope had its foundation in 2 Sam 7:11-16, where God promised King David that he would raise up descendants after him and establish his throne forever. With the decline and subsequent collapse of Israel as a kingdom, the Old Testament prophets predicted the coming of the Messiah (Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25), the king who would deliver God’s people and reign forever on David’s throne.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel writers take a special interest in showing that Jesus is truly the promised Messiah (see e.g., Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:32-33, 69-70), but that he has fulfilled the messianic promises in a surprising way. After Peter confessed that Jesus is “the Messiah sent from God,” Jesus immediately began teaching about the Messiah’s suffering (Luke 9:20-22). As Jesus approached Jerusalem for the last time, he was recognized as the King coming in the name of the Lord (Luke 18:36-38; 19:36-38), but then he was rejected (Luke 22:66-71) and crucified, mocked as “king of the Jews” and “God’s Messiah” (Luke 23:35-39).<\/p>\n<p>On the third day, however, Jesus rose victorious from the dead, just as he predicted. During his appearances to the disciples he revealed that the Scriptures predicted all along that “the Messiah would have to suffer all these things before entering his glory” (24:26). Jesus’ death and resurrection confirm that he is truly the Messiah and that his death brings restoration and forgiveness of sins (24:46-47).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:11-16; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-5; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Ezek 37:24-25; Luke 2:25-32; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hope for the Messiah In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people. The Hebrew word Messiah is equivalent to the Greek word Christ—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the ...","summary_en":"Hope for the Messiah In the first century, many Jews eagerly looked for the coming of the Messiah, a deliverer who would defeat Israel’s enemies and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for God’s people. The Hebrew word Messiah is equivalent to the Greek word Christ—both mean “Anointed One.” The term comes from the practice of anointing Israelite kings with oil at their enthronement to confirm their appointment to rule the nation as God’s representative. Thus the term came to refer to the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"67":[{"id":56234,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:67","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:67","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:67-68<\/strong> <em>If I tell you, you won’t believe me:<\/em> Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:67-68<\/strong> <em>If I tell you, you won’t believe me:<\/em> Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:67-68 If I tell you, you won’t believe me: Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.","summary_en":"22:67-68 If I tell you, you won’t believe me: Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83860,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:67","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:67","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:67-68<\/strong> <em>If I tell you, you won’t believe me:<\/em> Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:67-68<\/strong> <em>If I tell you, you won’t believe me:<\/em> Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:67-68 If I tell you, you won’t believe me: Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.","summary_en":"22:67-68 If I tell you, you won’t believe me: Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111486,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:67","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:67","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:67-68<\/strong> <em>If I tell you, you won’t believe me:<\/em> Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:67-68<\/strong> <em>If I tell you, you won’t believe me:<\/em> Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:67-68 If I tell you, you won’t believe me: Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.","summary_en":"22:67-68 If I tell you, you won’t believe me: Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139112,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:67","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:67","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:67-68<\/strong> <em>If I tell you, you won’t believe me:<\/em> Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:67-68<\/strong> <em>If I tell you, you won’t believe me:<\/em> Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:67-68 If I tell you, you won’t believe me: Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.","summary_en":"22:67-68 If I tell you, you won’t believe me: Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of the question. They had already made up their minds that he was not the Messiah, so it would do no good to answer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"69":[{"id":35877,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56235,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:69","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:69","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:69<\/strong> Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to <em>God’s right hand<\/em> (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would <em>be seated in the place of power<\/em> as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:69<\/strong> Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to <em>God’s right hand<\/em> (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would <em>be seated in the place of power<\/em> as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:69 Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to God’s right hand (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would be seated in the place of power as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.","summary_en":"22:69 Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to God’s right hand (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would be seated in the place of power as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83861,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:69","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:69","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:69<\/strong> Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to <em>God’s right hand<\/em> (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would <em>be seated in the place of power<\/em> as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:69<\/strong> Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to <em>God’s right hand<\/em> (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would <em>be seated in the place of power<\/em> as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:69 Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to God’s right hand (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would be seated in the place of power as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.","summary_en":"22:69 Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to God’s right hand (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would be seated in the place of power as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111487,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:69","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:69","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:69<\/strong> Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to <em>God’s right hand<\/em> (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would <em>be seated in the place of power<\/em> as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:69<\/strong> Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to <em>God’s right hand<\/em> (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would <em>be seated in the place of power<\/em> as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:69 Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to God’s right hand (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would be seated in the place of power as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.","summary_en":"22:69 Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to God’s right hand (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would be seated in the place of power as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139113,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:69","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:69","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:69<\/strong> Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to <em>God’s right hand<\/em> (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would <em>be seated in the place of power<\/em> as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:69<\/strong> Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to <em>God’s right hand<\/em> (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would <em>be seated in the place of power<\/em> as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:69 Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to God’s right hand (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would be seated in the place of power as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.","summary_en":"22:69 Jesus referred to Ps 110:1 (cp. Luke 20:42-43). Though he would be crucified, Jesus would be vindicated through his resurrection and exalted to God’s right hand (see Acts 2:33-36; cp. Dan 7:13-14). Furthermore, he would be seated in the place of power as Judge. Jesus would soon sit in judgment over those who were trying him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"70":[{"id":56236,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:70","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:70","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:70<\/strong> The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be <em>the Son of God<\/em> and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • <em>You say that I am:<\/em> This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means.” They understood it as a confirmation (Luke 22:71).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:70<\/strong> The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be <em>the Son of God<\/em> and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • <em>You say that I am:<\/em> This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means.” They understood it as a confirmation (Luke 22:71).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:70 The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be the Son of God and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • You say that I am: This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means...","summary_en":"22:70 The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be the Son of God and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • You say that I am: This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83862,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:70","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:70","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:70<\/strong> The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be <em>the Son of God<\/em> and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • <em>You say that I am:<\/em> This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means.” They understood it as a confirmation (Luke 22:71).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:70<\/strong> The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be <em>the Son of God<\/em> and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • <em>You say that I am:<\/em> This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means.” They understood it as a confirmation (Luke 22:71).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:70 The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be the Son of God and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • You say that I am: This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means...","summary_en":"22:70 The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be the Son of God and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • You say that I am: This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111488,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:70","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:70","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:70<\/strong> The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be <em>the Son of God<\/em> and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • <em>You say that I am:<\/em> This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means.” They understood it as a confirmation (Luke 22:71).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:70<\/strong> The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be <em>the Son of God<\/em> and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • <em>You say that I am:<\/em> This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means.” They understood it as a confirmation (Luke 22:71).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:70 The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be the Son of God and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • You say that I am: This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means...","summary_en":"22:70 The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be the Son of God and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • You say that I am: This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139114,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:70","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:70","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:70<\/strong> The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be <em>the Son of God<\/em> and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • <em>You say that I am:<\/em> This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means.” They understood it as a confirmation (Luke 22:71).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:70<\/strong> The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be <em>the Son of God<\/em> and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • <em>You say that I am:<\/em> This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means.” They understood it as a confirmation (Luke 22:71).<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:70 The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be the Son of God and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • You say that I am: This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means...","summary_en":"22:70 The significance of Jesus’ statement (22:69) was not lost on the council members. The Messiah was expected to be the Son of God and have a special father–son relationship with God (see study notes on 1:32-33; 4:41; cp. 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7; 89:26). The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of claiming to be the Messiah (cp. study notes on Mark 14:62, 63-64). • You say that I am: This is a qualified affirmation. Jesus probably meant, “What you say is true, but you do not understand what ‘Messiah’ means...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"71":[{"id":56237,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:71","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:71","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:71<\/strong> <em>Why do we need other witnesses?<\/em> The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:71<\/strong> <em>Why do we need other witnesses?<\/em> The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:71 Why do we need other witnesses? The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.","summary_en":"22:71 Why do we need other witnesses? The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83863,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:71","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:71","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:71<\/strong> <em>Why do we need other witnesses?<\/em> The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:71<\/strong> <em>Why do we need other witnesses?<\/em> The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:71 Why do we need other witnesses? The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.","summary_en":"22:71 Why do we need other witnesses? The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111489,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:71","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:71","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:71<\/strong> <em>Why do we need other witnesses?<\/em> The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:71<\/strong> <em>Why do we need other witnesses?<\/em> The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:71 Why do we need other witnesses? The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.","summary_en":"22:71 Why do we need other witnesses? The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139115,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Luca 22:71","title_en":"Study Note: Luca 22:71","content_ro":"<p><strong>22:71<\/strong> <em>Why do we need other witnesses?<\/em> The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>22:71<\/strong> <em>Why do we need other witnesses?<\/em> The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.<\/p>","summary_ro":"22:71 Why do we need other witnesses? The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.","summary_en":"22:71 Why do we need other witnesses? The high council regarded Jesus’ confirmation that he was both the Messiah and the Son of God as a blasphemous claim and thus as proof of his guilt.","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 22
📘 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! ✨